Physical Activity and Investigation With Magnetic Resonance Imaging Partly Explain Variability in the Prevalence of Patellar Tendon Abnormalities: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis of Imaging Studies in Asymptomatic Individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To estimate the pooled prevalence of, and factors associated with, the presence of patellar tendon abnormalities observed on imaging in people without symptoms. Design Systematic review with stratified meta-analysis and meta-regression. Literature Search We searched Embase, Scopus, MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science from 1980 to August 2020. Study Selection Criteria We included studies that reported the prevalence of asymptomatic patellar tendon abnormalities on imaging. We excluded studies of participants with current tendon pain, a history of tendon pain, or other systemic conditions. Data Synthesis Stratification and meta-regression of studies based on study-level descriptive statistics (mean age, body mass index, proportion of female participants, physical activity participation, imaging modality) were performed using a random-effects model to account for between-study heterogeneity. Risk of bias was assessed using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results Meta-analysis of 64 studies (7125 limbs from 4616 participants) found significant between-study heterogeneity (I2≥90%, P<.01), which precluded a summary prevalence estimate. Heterogeneity was partially explained by studies that included participants who were physically active and studies that assessed tendon abnormalities using magnetic resonance imaging compared to ultrasound (P<.05). Mean age, body mass index, proportion of female participants, and sample size did not explain the remaining heterogeneity. Conclusion There was substantial variability in the reported prevalence of asymptomatic patellar tendon abnormalities. A clear and valid method is needed to assess and report the presence of patellar tendon abnormalities to increase research capacity and establish the clinical value of imaging the patellar tendon. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(5):216–231. Epub 28 Mar 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10054
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 | 0.030 | 0.081 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.045 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".