MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022245636 · doi:10.4081/or.2020.8457

Critical shoulder angle is intrinsically associated with the development of degenerative shoulder diseases: A systematic review

2020· review· en· W3022245636 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dimitrios Stamiris, Stavros Stamiris, Kyriakos Papavasiliou, Michail Potoupnis, Eleftherios Tsiridis, Ioannis Sarris

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopedic Reviews · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisSystematic reviewInclusion and exclusion criteriaRotator cuffPhysical therapyTearsMeta-analysisRotator cuff injurySurgeryInternal medicineMEDLINEPathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim of this study was to investigate the potential influence of Critical Shoulder Angle (CSA) as a predisposing factor for the development of degenerative full-thickness rotator cuff tears (DRCT) or primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis (PGOA). A systematic review of the Pubmed, Scopus, Mendeley, ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials online databases was performed for literature regarding CSA and its association with DRCT and PGOA. In order to evaluate solely the relationship between CSA as a predisposing factor for the development of the aforementioned degenerative shoulder diseases (DSDs), we precluded any study in which traumatic cases were not clearly excluded. Our search strategy identified 289 studies in total, nine of which were eligible for inclusion based on our pre-established criteria. Quality assessment contacted using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale for case-control studies. There were a total of 998 patients with DRCT and 285 patients with PGOA. The control groups consisted of a total of 538 patients. The mean CSA ranged from 33.9° to 41.01° for the DRCT group, from 27.3° to 29.8° for the PGOA group and from 30.2° to 37.28° for the control group. All studies reported statistically significant differences between the DRCT and PGOA groups and the respective control groups. Our study results showed that there is moderate evidence in the literature supporting an intrinsic role of CSA in the development of DSDs. Level of evidence: IV. Systematic review of diagnostic studies, Level II-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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopedic ReviewsSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207