Cuttable plate fixation for small breed dogs with radius and ulna fractures: Retrospective study of 31 dogs.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This retrospective study evaluated complication rates for radius and ulna fractures in small breed dogs in which 1.5 mm to 2.7 mm cuttable bone plates were used for internal fixation. The medical records of all cases from 2004 to 2011 that were presented to our clinic were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were: dogs with body weight < 9 kg, fracture of the radius and ulna with open reduction, and internal fixation utilizing a cuttable bone plate. Thirty-four fractures in 31 dogs met the inclusion criteria. Of 25 dogs that were available for follow-up, all achieved union, minor complications occurred in 9, and major complications occurred in 8. External coaptation was responsible for complications in 8 cases and the need for coaptation needs to be investigated. Excluding minor complications, 32% of patients required at least 1 additional surgery or additional hospitalization. All but 2 of the dogs returned to full function. The 1.5 mm straight plate was successfully used in all dogs with a body weight of 0.9 to 2.6 kg.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".