Management Options and Outcomes for Patients with Femoral Fractures with Post-Polio Syndrome of the Lower Extremity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Post-polio syndrome is characterized by a late functional deterioration (usually after >=15 years from the initial infection) in patients with a history of paralytic poliomyelitis infection, and it is defined by the March of Dimes criteria. Patients with post-polio syndrome are at increased risk for falls and associated hip and femoral fractures as a result of lower bone mineral density, decreased lean muscle mass, and musculoskeletal deformities. Current evidence suggests that treatment modalities for femoral fractures should emphasize fixation that allows early progressive weight-bearing and ambulation to optimize functional outcomes. Good results after hip arthroplasty have been described with both cemented and uncemented implants in patients who have been treated for osteoarthritis, but there has been little evidence guiding hip fracture management. Anatomic challenges that are encountered are osteoporotic bone, a valgus neck-shaft angle, increased femoral anteversion, and a small femoral canal diameter. Intramedullary nailing of hip and femoral fractures can be challenging due to the small femoral canal diameter that frequently is encountered. Alternative methods of fixation have shown promising results. These include the use of sliding hip screws for hip fracture management and fixed-angle locking plates for hip and femoral fracture management.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".