Sciatic Nerve Anatomical Relationship with the Piriformis Muscle and its Point of Division
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to examine the course of the Sciatic Nerve (SN) and identify anatomical variations 1) between SN and the piriformis muscle (PM), and 2) in SN's point of division into the common peroneal and tibial nerves. The anatomical relationship between SN and PM was classified based on Beaton and Anson's six types of classification, finding 96.3% of the 82 lower limbs followed a typical anatomical relationship (type I), and 3.7% of the lower limbs showed one branch of SN piercing through the PM with the other branch running posterior to PM (type II). No incidence of the other types was found. As for SN's point of division, the mean division distance is expressed ± confidence intervals for all lower limbs (10.54±1.47cm), right (11.52±2.44cm), left (9.57±1.60cm), male (10.27±2.17cm), and female lower limbs (10.89±3.86cm). The median division distance is calculated with an interquartile range (lower limit, upper limit) as 8.30cm (6.15,13.10) for all lower limbs, 8.55cm (6.30,15.17) for right and 8.20cm (6.10,10.91) for left lower limbs, 9.10cm (6.56,13.10) for male and 7.60cm (5.75,12.42) for female lower limbs. A significant difference was not found in SN's mean division distance between right vs. left lower limbs (p‐value = 0.19) and male vs. female (p‐value = 0.68). This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".