MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209720847 · doi:10.1111/joa.13582

Anatomical, functional and biomechanical review of the glenoid labrum

2021· review· en· W3209720847 on OpenAlexaff
Yousef A. Almajed, Andrew C. Hall, Thomas H. Gillingwater, Abduelmenem Alashkham

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Anatomy · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Centre
FundersKing Saud UniversityUniversity of Edinburgh
KeywordsLabrumGlenoid labrumAnatomyBiomechanicsComputer scienceMedicineArthroscopySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The glenohumeral joint is the most mobile joint in the human skeleton, supported by both active and passive stabilisers. As one of the passive stabilisers, the glenoid labrum has increasingly been recognised to play an important role in stability of the glenohumeral joint, acting to maintain intraarticular pressure, centralise the humeral head and contribute to concavity-compression stability. Several studies have investigated the macro- and micro-anatomical features of the labrum as well as its biomechanical function. However, in order to better understand the role of the labrum and its mechanics, a comprehensive anatomical, functional and biomechanical review of these studies is needed. Therefore, this article reviews the current literature detailing anatomical descriptions of the glenoid labrum, with an emphasis on its function(s) and biomechanics, as well as its interaction with neighbouring structures. The intimate relationship between the labrum and the surrounding structures was found to be important in glenohumeral stability, which owes further investigation into the microanatomy of labrum to better understand this relationship.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 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

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AnatomySame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207