MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2771824350 · doi:10.29007/zh41

Quantifying Dynamic Assessment of Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip

2018· article· en· W2771824350 on OpenAlexaff
Olivia Paserin, Niamul Quader, Kishore Mulpuri, Anthony Cooper, Emily K. Schaeffer, Antony J. Hodgson, Rafeef Abugharbieh

Bibliographic record

VenueEPiC series in health sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFemoral headMedicineHip dysplasiaSubluxationNuclear medicineRadiologySurgeryPathologyRadiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although physical and ultrasound (US)-based screening for congenital deformities of the hip (developmental dysplasia of the hip, or DDH) is routinely performed in most countries, one of the most commonly performed maneuvers done under ultrasound observation - dynamic assessment - has been shown to be relatively unreliable and is associated with significant misdiagnosis rates, on the order of 29%. Our overall research objective is to develop a quantitative method of assessing hip instability, which we hope will standardize diagnosis across different raters and health-centers, and may perhaps improve reliability of diagnosis. To quantify dynamic assessment, we propose to use the variability in femoral head coverage (FHC) measurements within multiple US scans collected during a dynamic assessment. In every US scan, we use our recently-developed automatic FHC measuring tool which leverages phase symmetry features to approximate vertical cortex of ilium and a random forest classifier to identify approximate location of the femoral head. Having estimated FHC in each scan, we estimate the change in FHC across all the US scans during a dynamic assessment and compare this change with variability of FHC found in previous studies. Our findings - in a dynamic assessment on an infant done by an orthopaedic surgeon, the femoral centre moved by up to 19% of its diameter during distraction, from 55% FHC to 74% FHC. This change in FHC is slightly greater than its variability in static US scans reported in previous studies, suggesting that the distraction force likely produced a real lateral displacement. Our clinician’s qualitative assessment concluded the hip to be normal as this degree of distraction was not indicative of instability. This suggests that our technique likely has sufficient resolution and repeatability to quantify differences in laxity between stable and unstable hips, although this presumption will have to be confirmed in a subsequent study with additional subjects. The long-term significance of this approach to evaluating dynamic assessments may lie in increasing early diagnostic sensitivity in order to prevent dysplasia remaining undetected prior to manifesting itself in early adulthood joint disease.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEPiC series in health sciencesSame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207