MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617351572 · doi:10.1186/s13643-017-0501-z

Ultrasound characteristics of the mid-portion of the Achilles tendon in runners: a systematic review protocol

2017· review· en· W2617351572 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Prue Molyneux, Matthew Carroll, Sarah Stewart, Angela Brenton‐Rule, Keith Rome

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAchilles tendonTendinopathyCINAHLPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMEDLINEProtocol (science)UltrasonographySystematic reviewUltrasoundTendonSurgeryAlternative medicinePathologyRadiologyPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Achilles tendinopathy is one of the most common overuse injuries in recreational and competitive runners, yet the clinical significance and frequency of abnormal sonographic characteristics in runners remains unclear. This paper presents a protocol for a systematic review which aims to assess existing literature which has employed ultrasonography to evaluate characteristics of the mid-portion of the Achilles tendon in runners. METHODS: An electronic literature search will be conducted using the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus. Studies published in English will be included if they evaluate ultrasound characteristics associated with mid-portion Achilles tendinopathy in runners. Methodological quality will be assessed using a scale adapted from the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. DISCUSSION: This will be the first systematic review to summarise the existing evidence on ultrasound characteristics of the mid-portion of the Achilles tendon in recreational runners. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016050509.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.074
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0740.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.014
Bibliometrics0.0180.014
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0090.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.009

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicTendon Structure and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207