A health utility assessment of trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition for thumb trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI) for trapeziometacarpal joint osteoarthritis may have both postoperative benefits and complications. This study sought to determine the health state utility outcome measures of trapeziectomy with LRTI. Patients who underwent trapeziectomy with LRTI were invited to complete the brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire and utility questionnaires outcomes using a visual analogue scale , time trade-off and standard gamble. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were derived from these utility measures. For this study 32 patients were recruited, with a mean age of 61. Most patients (27/32) perceived the procedure as successful. Utility measures and QALYs serve the purpose of comparing different surgical procedures in terms of their impact on the quality of life of patients as a function of the benefits and complications of each procedure. In this study, the utility of trapeziectomy with LRTI was less than has been described for open palmar fasciectomy but more than for total wrist arthrodesis. Level of evidence: IV
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".