MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896275952 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.cc.18.00014

Greater Arc Perilunate Injury Through a Lunotriquetral Carpal Coalition

2018· article· en· W2896275952 on OpenAlexaff
Kate Elzinga, John R. Lien

Bibliographic record

VenueJBJS Case Connector · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScaphoid fractureWristKirschner wireSurgeryGrip strengthDeformityFixation (population genetics)Avulsion fractureOrthodonticsInternal fixationAvulsion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CASE: A 31-year-old Caucasian man presented with a greater arc perilunate variant injury after falling from a friend's shoulders onto an outstretched hand. Imaging revealed a minimally displaced scaphoid waist fracture and a nondisplaced transverse fracture through a previously unrecognized lunotriquetral coalition. A volar intercalated segmental instability (VISI) deformity was present. Open reduction with osseous fixation (a headless compression screw for the scaphoid waist fracture and 3 Kirschner wires across the midcarpal joint) and repair of the torn volar ligaments partially restored the carpal alignment. At 1 year postoperatively, the patient had regained approximately 90% of grip and pinch strength, 70% of wrist flexion, and 80% of wrist extension when compared with the contralateral, uninjured side. Despite persistent VISI alignment, he was satisfied with the outcome and had returned to his preoperative employment and recreational activities. CONCLUSION: A high index of suspicion for a perilunate injury should be maintained for all scaphoid fractures, particularly when abnormal anatomy is present.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJBJS Case ConnectorSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207