Morphometric geometric differences between right and left human tali: A cadaveric study of fluctuating asymmetry via systematic measurement and three-dimensional scanning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about differences in the size and morphology of the right and left human tali. The present study demonstrates differences between right and left talar morphometric geometric profiles as fluctuating asymmetry in matched pairs of cadaveric specimens. METHODS: In total, 24 tali were collected in this study. All eligible tali were systematically measured with a Vernier caliper and three-dimensional laser scanner, which provided data for further analysis regarding the talar morphometric geometric profiles. Data were calculated to demonstrate differences between the right and left talar profiles using a matched-pair method, including the general size of the talus. RESULTS: The average talar length was 53.5 mm, the average talar dome height was 31.2 mm, and the average talar body width was 41.3 mm. The average anterior trochlear width, middle trochlear width, posterior trochlear width, and trochlear length were 31.8, 31.2, 28.3, and 30.7 mm, respectively. Eleven matched pairs of intact tali were eligible for the matched-pair study. Paired t-tests showed significant differences in the talar dome height (P = 0.019), middle trochlear width (P = 0.027), and posterior trochlear width (P = 0.016) between the right and left tali. However, there were no significant differences in the surface area or volume between the right and left tali. CONCLUSION: Significant differences in the morphometric profile were found between the right and left matched pairs of tali. This basic information indicates that the profile of the contralateral talus may not be used as a single reference to reconstruct or duplicate the talus of interest in certain conditions such as talar prosthesis implantation or customized total ankle replacement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".