MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2944388099 · doi:10.1136/sbmj.i6081

How to apply a cast for forearm fractures

2017· article· en· W2944388099 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick G. Robinson, A R M Macey, Ian S. Johnston, Andrew Macey

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForearmComputer scienceData scienceMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The forearm bones (radius and ulna) are the two most commonly broken bones in the body.1 Immediate management of these injuries includes applying a plaster cast—called a back slab—to the dorsal aspect of the forearm. These casts are a simple and effective way of providing temporary stabilisation of the fracture and pain relief. All medical students and junior doctors should know how to apply a dorsal back slab.2 It is usually applied in the emergency department or orthopaedic theatre, but it might also be required during expeditions or in remote settings on elective placement. The back slab bridges the gap in treatment until definite fracture fixation takes place—that is, an operation is planned within a few days or a full circumferential cast is applied once swelling has settled. In both cases, a fracture of a forearm bone will take about six weeks to heal. It is important that a back slab does not encircle the limb to allow for some expansion secondary to swelling, and it should be easy to remove. A back slab can be applied with or without manipulation of the fracture, and it can play an important part in managing a fracture conservatively. However, application of the back slab is not without its risks. Circulatory or nerve impairment can occur if a back slab is applied too tightly, and pressure ulcers can develop if padding at bony prominences is not applied appropriately.23 Practice is all that is required to become proficient in applying a cast, and the fracture clinic or emergency department plaster room can be a source of training and support. The principles learnt from casting the forearm can be applied to other parts of the body. The British Orthopaedic Association’s patient liaison group states that they expect that anyone who requires …

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.038

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.331 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ→Same topicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→