MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772542945 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000009027

Operative versus nonoperative treatment of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures

2017· review· en· W2772542945 on OpenAlex
Ning Wei, Peizhi Yuwen, Wei Liu, Yanbin Zhu, Wenli Chang, Wei Chen

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Hebei ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineCochrane LibraryConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialRelative riskSurgeryCalcaneusAnkleOrthopedic surgeryNeurovascular bundleMeta-analysisMEDLINEPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The relative efficacy of operative and nonoperative treatments for the displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures (DIACF) remains uncertain. OBJECT: We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of operative and nonoperative treatments in treating patients with DIACF. METHODS: Databases including Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, CBM, CNKI, and Google Scholar were searched. After independent study selection by 2 authors, data were extracted and collected independently. Comparisons were performed between operative treatment group and nonoperative treatment group. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RevMan 5.3 was used for data analysis. The primary outcome measures were anatomical measures (changes in Böhler angle and calcaneal height and width), functional measures (shoe problems, resuming preinjury work, and residual pain), and complications (including superficial and deep wound infection, skin flap necrosis, neurovascular injury, secondary arthrodesis, reflex sympathetic dystrophy, osteotomy, thromboembolism, and compartment syndromes). RESULTS: Eighteen trials (8 randomized controlled trials and 10 controlled clinical trials) including 1467 patients were considered. For anatomical measurements, the overall mean differences (MDs) for the mean Böhler angle, calcaneal height and width were 15.39 (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.12-21.67), 6.55 (95% CI 2.67-10.43), and 7.05 (95% CI -7.83 to -6.27), respectively. In functional measures, the overall effect MD of American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society was 6.23 (95% CI 5.22-17.67) and 0.38 (95% CI 0.22-0.67). The overall relative risks (RRs) of wearing shoes, resuming preinjury work, and having residual pain were 0.32 (95% CI 0.32-1.00), 0.56 (95% CI 0.40-0.77), and 0.90 (95% CI 0.68-1.20), respectively. The overall RR of the incidence of complications was 2.00 (95% CI 1.51-2.64). CONCLUSION: Operative treatment of DIACF may lead to a higher incidence of complications but has better anatomical recovery when compared with nonoperative treatment.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.298 · 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