MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800815983 · doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-16-00565

Primary and Secondary Total Knee Arthroplasty for Tibial Plateau Fractures

2018· review· en· W2800815983 on OpenAlexaff
Iain Stevenson, Tristan E. McMillan, Santosh Baliga, Emil H. Schemitsch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArthroplastySurgeryTibial plateau fractureComplicationTotal knee arthroplastyFixation (population genetics)Knee JointInternal fixationPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The surgical management of tibial plateau fractures can be technically demanding. In younger patients, the mainstay is fixation with cartilage preservation. In older patients with osteoporotic bone, this method has higher rates of fixation failure; in addition, it requires prolonged bed rest or protected weight bearing, which are major challenges in this group. In contrast, total knee arthroplasty performed acutely for primary treatment of tibial plateau fractures has potential advantages for elderly patients, such as immediate stability, early mobilization, and positive functional outcomes with decreased rates of reoperation. Additionally, arthroplasty can be technically challenging in younger patients with previous tibial plateau fractures in whom debilitating posttraumatic arthritis develops. In these patients, old wounds, retained metalwork, bony deficiency, and instability can lead to poorer outcomes and higher complication rates than in routine knee arthroplasty. In both cases, we recommend surgery be performed by experienced arthroplasty surgeons with ample access to a range of implants with varying constraints and the option of stems and augments.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations48
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic SurgeonsSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207