MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014823345 · doi:10.1007/s00167-020-05966-x

Deep gluteal syndrome is defined as a non-discogenic sciatic nerve disorder with entrapment in the deep gluteal space: a systematic review

2020· review· en· W3014823345 on OpenAlexaff
Kazuha Kizaki, Soshi Uchida, Ajaykumar Shanmugaraj, Camila Aquino, Andrew Duong, Nicole Simunovic, Hal David Martin, Olufemi R. Ayeni

Bibliographic record

VenueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpactMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSciaticaSciatic nerveGluteal musclesLow back painPhysical examinationMagnetic resonance imagingPiriformis syndromeRadiologyPhysical therapySurgeryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPathologyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Clinicians are not confident in diagnosing deep gluteal syndrome (DGS) because of the ambiguity of the DGS disease definition and DGS diagnostic pathway. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the DGS disease definition, and also to define a general DGS diagnostic pathway. METHODS: A systematic search was performed using four electronic databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. In eligibility criteria, studies in which cases were explicitly diagnosed with DGS were included, whereas review articles and commentary papers were excluded. Data are presented descriptively. RESULTS: The initial literature search yielded 359 articles, of which 14 studies met the eligibility criteria, pooling 853 patients with clinically diagnosed with DGS. In this review, it was discovered that the DGS disease definition was composed of three parts: (1) non-discogenic, (2) sciatic nerve disorder, and (3) nerve entrapment in the deep gluteal space. In the diagnosis of DGS, we found five diagnostic procedures: (1) history taking, (2) physical examination, (3) imaging tests, (4) response-to-injection, and (5) nerve-specific tests (electromyography). History taking (e.g. posterior hip pain, radicular pain, and difficulty sitting for 30 min), physical examination (e.g. tenderness in deep gluteal space, pertinent positive results with seated piriformis test, and positive Pace sign), and imaging tests (e.g. pelvic radiographs, spine and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)) were generally performed in cases clinically diagnosed with DGS. CONCLUSION: Existing literature suggests the DGS disease definition as being a non-discogenic sciatic nerve disorder with entrapment in the deep gluteal space. Also, the general diagnostic pathway for DGS was composed of history taking (posterior hip pain, radicular pain, and difficulty sitting for 30 min), physical examination (tenderness in deep gluteal space, positive seated piriformis test, and positive Pace sign), and imaging tests (pelvic radiographs, pelvic MRI, and spine MRI). This review helps clinicians diagnose DGS with more confidence. 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.273 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations33
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology ArthroscopySame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207