MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807972874 · doi:10.16965/ijpr.2018.139

CORRELATION BETWEEN PES PLANUS AND TIBIOFEMORAL ANGLE MEASUREMENT IN NORMAL, HEALTHY YOUNG ADULTS

2018· article· en· W2807972874 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hefaa Alsaleh, Marilyn Moffat

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Physiotherapy and Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork University
KeywordsMedicineCorrelationOrthodonticsGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Pes planus deformity of the feet is primarily an asymptomatic condition that alters the lower limb biomechanics.It is associated with changes in knee alignment among older adults and subjects with osteoarthritis.No data are available on the correlation between pes planus and knee alignment among young adults.Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine if a correlation exists between the presence of pes planus and tibiofemoral angle measurement in normal, healthy young adults.Methods: Thirty subjects had their flat footedness assessed by using Feiss' line test.The tibiofemoral angle was assessed through a photograph of their lower limbs, and the data from the photograph were processed using the SCODIAC program.Results: No significant differences were found between pes planus and tibiofemoral angle among healthy, young adults.Seven subjects had bilateral structural flat feet, while most of the participants had 1 st degree flat foot.Knee genu varum was observed in most of the participants. Conclusions:Although there was no significant correlation between pes planus and tibiofemoral angle measurement among young healthy adults, the findings of this study agreed with the previous studies that was done on older adults and subjects with knee osteoarthritis in the fact that most of the pes planus feet had genu varum knee alignment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Physiotherapy and ResearchSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207