MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033718879 · doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-20-00062

Evaluation and Management of Carpal Fractures Other Than the Scaphoid

2020· review· en· W3033718879 on OpenAlexaff
Louis W. Catalano, Shobhit V. Minhas, David J. Kirby

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsObject Research Systems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNonunionScaphoid fractureCarpal bonesSurgeryFixation (population genetics)RadiographyPercutaneousAvascular necrosisNerve injuryPresentation (obstetrics)ArthrodesisRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fractures of the carpus can be debilitating injuries and often lead to chronic pain and dysfunction when not properly treated. Although scaphoid fractures are more common, fractures of the other carpal bones account for nearly half of all injuries of the carpus. Often missed on initial presentation, a focused physical examination with imaging tailored to the suspected injury is needed to identify these fractures. In addition to plain radiographs, advanced imaging such as CT and MRI are helpful in diagnosis and management. Treatment of carpal fractures is based on the degree of displacement, stability of the fracture, and associated injuries. Those that require surgical fixation often affect the congruency of the articular surfaces, are unstable, are at risk for symptomatic nonunion, are associated with notable ligamentous injury, or are causing nerve or tendon entrapment. Surgical strategies involve percutaneous Kirschner wires, external fixation, screws and/or plates, excision, or fusion for salvage. Owing to the intimate articulations in the hand, small size of the carpal bones, and complex vascular supply, carpal fracture complications include symptomatic nonunion, osteonecrosis, and posttraumatic arthritis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic SurgeonsSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207