MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

High Tibial Osteotomy for Varus Deformity of the Knee

2021· review· en· W3180199365 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Murray, Philipp W. Winkler, Humza S. Shaikh, Volker Musahl

Bibliographic record

VenueJAAOS Global Research and Reviews · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsObject Research Systems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh tibial osteotomyVarus deformityMedicineOsteoarthritisOsteotomyKnee JointDeformityMeniscusCompartment (ship)TibiaSurgeryCartilageOrthodonticsAnatomyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High tibial osteotomy is a powerful technique to treat symptomatic varus deformity of the knee and is successful when properly indicated and performed. Indications include varus deformity with medial compartment osteoarthritis, cartilage or meniscus pathology. Several techniques exist to correct symptomatic varus malalignment along with concomitant procedures to restore cartilage or meniscus injuries. Evidence supporting high tibial osteotomy for symptomatic medial compartment pathology exists, which provides a durable solution for joint preservation. This review will discuss the indications, techniques, and outcomes for high tibial osteotomies used in the treatment of symptomatic varus deformity of the knee.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.486
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 teacher head, 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

Citations60
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAAOS Global Research and ReviewsSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207