MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2488650849 · doi:10.1080/21681163.2016.1216805

Comparison of anatomical parameters of cam femoroacetabular impingement to evaluate hip joint models segmented from CT data

2016· article· en· W2488650849 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering Imaging & Visualization · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsFemoroacetabular impingementFemoral headMedicineAcetabulumFemoral neckFemurNuclear medicineSegmentationOrthodonticsAnatomyRadiologyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSurgeryOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Subject-specific anatomical finite element models obtained from three-dimensional (3D) segmentation have the potential to provide great insights into the pathomechanisms of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Still, the accuracy of the geometries used to construct these models needs to be evaluated. To this aim, we segmented 54 (n = 54; age = 34 ± 7 years; BMI = 26 ± 4 kg/m2) hip joint models from subject-specific computed tomography (CT) images, and measured multiple anatomical parameters (axial alpha angle, radial alpha angle, femoral head–neck offset, femoral neck–shaft angle, medial proximal femoral angle, femoral torsion, acetabular version and centre–edge angle) from both the multiplanar images and the 3D models, to assess the intraobserver, interobserver and intermethod reliabilities. We implemented a method to ensure that anatomical characteristics from segmented models were representative of original CT data. Observations from both CT data and 3D models demonstrated strong to near-perfect intraobserver, interobserver and intermethod agreements (p < 0.01). Bland–Altman plots indicated a slight discrepancy when assessing the asymptomatic FAI population, where planar CT images possibly did not capture the full depth of the cam deformity and underestimated geometric parameters. We indicated possible discrepancies to expect when segmenting hip joint models for clinical evaluation and finite element modelling, notably when observing femoral head–neck offset.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.329 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it