MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2509728136 · doi:10.1177/0363546516660064

International Meniscus Reconstruction Experts Forum (IMREF) 2015 Consensus Statement on the Practice of Meniscal Allograft Transplantation

2016· article· en· W2509728136 on OpenAlexaff
Alan Getgood, Robert F. LaPrade, Peter Verdonk, Wayne Gersoff, Brian J. Cole, Tim Spalding, Annunziato Amendola, Andrew A. Amis, Seong‐Il Bin, William D. Bugbee, David N.M. Caborn, Tom Carter, Kai‐Ming Chan, C Cohen, Moisés Cohen, Vincenzo Condello, Tom DeBerardino, Florian Dirisamer, Lars Engebretsen, Jack Farr, Andreas H. Gomoll, Chris Harner, Mark Heard, Laurie A. Hiemstra, Jin Goo Kim, J.M. Kim, Jong‐Min Kim, Elizaveta Kon, Koen Laggae, Bum‐Sik Lee, Robert Litchfield, Robert G. McCormack, Ian McDermott, Juan C. Monlau, Peter Myers, Frank R. Noyes, Christian Patsch, James Robinson, Scott Rodeo, Seung-Suk Seo, Seth L. Sherman, Rainer Siebold, Martyn Snow, Kevin R. Stone, Scott Tashman, Peter Thompson, Ewoud van Arkel, Willem van der Merwe, René Verdonk, Andy Williams, Stefano Zaffagnini

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Sports Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsFowler Kennedy Sport Medicine ClinicWestern University
FundersAlloSourceSmith and NephewArthrexMusculoskeletal Transplant Foundation
KeywordsMeniscusStatement (logic)MedicineTransplantationSurgeryPhysical therapyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) has become relatively commonplace in specialized sport medicine practice for the treatment of patients with a symptomatic knee after the loss of a functional meniscus. The technique has evolved since the 1980s, and long-term results continue to improve. However, there still remains significant variation in how MAT is performed, and as such, there remains opportunity for outcome and graft survivorship to be optimized. The purpose of this article was to develop a consensus statement on the practice of MAT from key opinion leaders who are members of the International Meniscus Reconstruction Experts Forum so that a more standardized approach to the indications, surgical technique, and postoperative care could be outlined with the goal of ultimately improving patient outcomes.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations144
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207