MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2743910016 · doi:10.1097/bpb.0000000000000492

Guided growth for angular correction in children: a comparison of two tension band plate designs

2017· article· en· W2743910016 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics B · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone fractures and treatments
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysisMedicineDeformityRadiographyOrthodonticsRetrospective cohort studySurgeryEpiphysiodesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This retrospective cohort study examined 20 patients (48 physes), 11 boys and nine girls, who were treated with hinge-plate or eight-plate. The mean age of the patients at surgery was 11.9±2.6 years. The mean follow-up duration was 13±2.7 months. The radiographic measurement of both distal femoral and proximal tibial deformity showed significant correction, with no difference between the hinge-plate and the eight-plate. Both screw divergence angle and the hinge angle showed significant changes at the last follow-up. The deformity correction of the distal femoral physis was quicker than the proximal tibial physis. The rate of mechanical femoral-tibial angle correction was 0.97°/month if both femoral and tibial physes were treated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.307 · 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