Diagnostic Value of Acromiohumeral Distance in Rotator Cuff Pathology: Implications for Advanced-Practice Physiotherapists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The primary purpose of this study was to examine the inter-tester reliability and criterion validity of reduced acromiohumeral distance (AHD; <6 mm) visualized on plain radiographs in detecting rotator cuff (RC) pathology. The secondary objective was to examine the relationship between this radiographic feature and patient demographics and clinical examination. Method: This was a diagnostic study of patients seen in a tertiary care centre. Two advanced-practice physiotherapists measured AHD in two radiographic views. MRI was used as the gold standard. Results: A total of 150 consecutive patients (mean age 59 [SD 11] y, 57 women, 93 men) were included. AHD less than 6 millimetres was highly specific in both views for the presence of tear (99%), tear size (96%–98%), and fatty infiltration in the supraspinatus and infraspinatus muscles (93%–96%). The absence of AHD less than 6 millimetres was associated with a lack of advanced fatty infiltration in the supraspinatus and infraspinatus muscles (92%–100%). Sensitivity values were low for the presence and size of RC tear (21%–55%). We found a statistically significant positive association between the AHD categories and clinically observed muscle wasting and weakness of the RC muscles ( p < 0.05). Conclusions: AHD less than 6 millimetres was reliably measured in plain radiographs and was strongly associated with important clinical and imaging features of advanced RC pathology; this may assist with clinical decision making by allowing judicious use of more costly investigations and referral for surgery.
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 | 0.005 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".