MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765553727 · doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.10.009

Diagnostic Validity of Combining History Elements and Physical Examination Tests for Traumatic and Degenerative Symptomatic Meniscal Tears

2017· article· en· W2765553727 on OpenAlexafffund
Simon Décary, Michel Fallaha, Pierre Frémont, Johanne Martel‐Pelletier, Jean‐Pierre Pelletier, Debbie Feldman, Marie‐Pierre Sylvestre, Pascal‐André Vendittoli, François Desmeules

Bibliographic record

VenuePM&R · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicinePhysical examinationPhysical therapyOrthopedic surgeryGold standard (test)Medical historyMagnetic resonance imagingConfidence intervalSurgeryRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The current approach to the clinical diagnosis of traumatic and degenerative symptomatic meniscal tears (SMTs) proposes combining history elements and physical examination tests without systematic prescription of imaging investigations, yet the evidence to support this diagnostic approach is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of diagnostic clusters combining history elements and physical examination tests to diagnose or exclude traumatic and degenerative SMT compared with other knee disorders. DESIGN: Prospective diagnostic accuracy study. SETTINGS: Patients were recruited from 2 orthopedic clinics, 2 family medicine clinics, and from a university community. PATIENTS: A total of 279 consecutive patients who underwent consultation for a new knee complaint. METHODS: Each patient was assessed independently by 2 evaluators. History elements and standardized physical examination tests performed by a physiotherapist were compared with the reference standard: an expert physicians' composite diagnosis including a clinical examination and confirmatory magnetic resonance imaging. Participating expert physicians were orthopedic surgeons (n = 3) or sport medicine physicians (n = 2). Penalized logistic regression (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) was used to identify history elements and physical examination tests associated with the diagnosis of SMT and recursive partitioning was used to develop diagnostic clusters. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnostic accuracy measures were calculated including sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+/-) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Eighty patients had a diagnosis of SMT (28.7%), including 35 traumatic tears and 45 degenerative tears. The combination a history of trauma during a pivot, medial knee pain location, and a positive medial joint line tenderness test was able to diagnose (LR+ = 8.9; 95% CI 6.1-13.1) or exclude (LR- = 0.10; 95% CI 0.03-0.28) a traumatic SMT. Combining a history of progressive onset of pain, medial knee pain location, pain while pivoting, absence of valgus or varus knee misalignment, or full passive knee flexion was able to moderately diagnose (LR+ = 6.4; 95% CI 4.0-10.4) or exclude (LR- = 0.10; 95% CI 0.03-0.31) a degenerative SMT. Internal validation estimates were slightly lower for all clusters but demonstrated positive LR superior to 5 and negative LR inferior to 0.2 indicating moderate shift in posttest probability. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic clusters combining history elements and physical examination tests can support the differential diagnosis of SMT. These results represent the initial derivation of the clusters and external validation is mandatory. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePM&RSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207