MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113988094 · doi:10.2399/ana.20.779018

Three-dimensional architecture of the great toe muscles: functional implications in hallux valgus

2020· article· en· W3113988094 on OpenAlexaff
Valera Castanov, Maxine D. Vienneau, Takamitsu Arakawa, Syed Ahmed Hassan, Anne Agur, Diane Tyczynski

Bibliographic record

VenueAnatomy (International Journal of Experimental and Clinical Anatomy) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsMichener InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnatomyMuscle architectureValgusMedicineOrthodontics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Imbalance of great toe musculature has been identified as a factor in the development of hallux valgus. The musculoaponeurotic architecture, an important determinant of function, has not been investigated volumetrically in the great toe musculature. The purpose of this study was to reconstruct the abductor halluces (ABDH), adductor halluces (ADH), flexor hallucis brevis medial (FHBM) and lateral (FHBL) heads volumetrically and to quantify and compare their architectural parameters and functional characteristics. Methods: Ten formalin-embalmed specimens were dissected, digitized and modelled (Autodesk Maya®). Fiber bundle length (FBL) and physiological cross-sectional area (PCSA) of the muscles were compared using descriptive and parametric statistics. Results: The spatial arrangement of aponeuroses (AP) / fiber bundles (FB) and architectural parameters varied throughout the volume of each muscle. The PCSA of the medial (ABDH/FHBM) and lateral (ADH/FHBL) musculature was similar; however, the medial musculature had significantly greater mean FBL. Conclusion: Each muscle had varying AP/FB arrangement. The similar PCSA of the medial and lateral musculature suggests that their relative force generating capabilities are balanced in asymptomatic individuals.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnatomy (International Journal of Experimental and Clinical Anatomy)Same topicSports injuries and preventionFrench-language works237,207