MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fixation strength of four headless compression screws

2016· article· en· W2511810997 on OpenAlex
Adam Hart, Edward J. Harvey, Reza Rabiei, François Barthelat, Paul A. Martineau

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

VenueMedical Engineering & Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsFixation (population genetics)OsteotomyOrthodonticsScaphoid boneScaphoid fractureMedicineSurgeryBiomedical engineeringComposite materialMaterials scienceRadiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To promote a quicker return to function, an increasing number of patients are treated with headless screws for acute displaced and even non-displaced scaphoid fractures. Therefore, it is imperative to understand and optimize the biomechanical characteristics of different implants to support the demands of early mobilization. The objective of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical fixation strength of 4 headless compression screws under distracting and bending forces. The Acutrak Standard, Acutrak Mini, Synthes 3.0, and Herbert-Whipple screws were tested using a polyurethane foam scaphoid fracture model. Implants were inserted into the foam blocks across a linear osteotomy. Custom fixtures applied pull-apart and four-point bending forces until implant failure. Pull-apart testing was performed in three different foam densities in order to simulate osteoporotic, osteopenic, and normal bone. The peak pull-apart forces varied significantly between implants and were achieved by (from greatest to least): the Acutrak Standard, Synthes 3.0, Acutrak Mini, and Herbert-Whipple screws. The fully threaded screws (Acutrak) failed at their proximal threads while the shanked screw (Synthes and Herbert Whipple) failed at their distal threads. Similarly, the screws most resistant to bending were (from greatest to least): the Acutrak Standard, Acutrak Mini, Herbert-Whipple, and Synthes. Although the amount of force required for pull-apart failure increased with each increasing simulated bone density (a doubling in density required triple the amount of pull apart force), the mode and sequence of failure was the same. Overall, the fully threaded, conical design of the Acutrak screws demonstrated superior fixation against pull-apart and bending forces than the shanked designs of the Synthes and Herbert-Whipple. We also found a strong relationship between simulated bone density and pull-apart force.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.238 · 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