MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139222691 · doi:10.1097/oi9.0000000000000076

Impaction fractures of the anterior tibial plafond

2020· article· en· W3139222691 on OpenAlexaff
Moaz Bin Yunus Chohan, Christopher Del Balso, Michael Ching, Emil H. Schemitsch, Abdel‐Rahman Lawendy, David Sanders

Bibliographic record

VenueOTA International The Open Access Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone fractures and treatments
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpactionMedicineSurgeryAnkleInternal fixationArthrodesisCohortFixation (population genetics)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether patients with AO/OTA 43-B anterior impaction tibial plafond fractures have worse clinical outcomes, and an increased risk of progression to ankle arthrodesis. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Level 1 academic trauma center. PATIENTS: One hundred sixty-eight patients were included in the study, all of whom had tibial plafond fractures. INTERVENTION: Study patients underwent external fixation and/or open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) as indicated by fracture/injury pattern. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Arthrodesis rate. RESULTS: AO 43-B Anterior impaction tibial plafond fractures have an increased risk of progression to arthrodesis when compared to AO 43-B nonanterior impaction type fractures (19.4% vs 8%). CONCLUSIONS: AO 43-B anterior impaction tibial plafond fractures have a worse clinical outcome compared to AO 43-B nonanterior impaction fractures. These fractures also confer increased risk of progression to arthrodesis. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: The authors have no conflict of interests to declare.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOTA International The Open Access Journal of Orthopaedic TraumaSame topicBone fractures and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207