MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204975508 · doi:10.1016/j.jor.2021.10.006

Midterm results and complications rates in vancouver type B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures treated with modular fluted tapered stems

2021· article· en· W3204975508 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Iglesias Santiago L, Aguirre Gerardo, Fernando Vanoli, Pérez Alamino Leonel, Pioli Ignacio, Pablo Maletti, Lopreite Fernando A, Del Sel Hernán, Allende Bartolomé L

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeriprostheticMedicineSurgeryImplantFemurFemoral fractureFemur fractureBone healingArthroplastyDentistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaluate the mid-term success rate of these stems in periprosthetic femur fractures and to analyze the complications observed with the use of these stems. METHODS: Thirty five patients that underwent hip revision surgery secondary to Vancouver type B2 and B3 periprosthetic femur fracture were evaluated. In all cases, modular fluted tapered stems were used. RESULTS: Average follow-up was 42 months. Average Postoperative Harris Hip Score (HHS) was 78.11. Fracture healing was obtained in a 100% of the patients. Average implant survival was 50 months. CONCLUSION: Modular fluted tapered stems demonstrated a high rate implant stability, proximal femoral bone reconstitution, and fracture healing.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of OrthopaedicsSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207