Medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) is an effective surgical method for the treatment of lateral patellar instability. At present, there is not much controversies regarding the femoral attachment, however, the controversies regarding patellar attachment versus attachment, number of graft strands, tension, isometry and so on. The following electronic databases will be searched: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Medline. We will consider articles published between database initiation and March 2021. MPFL in the subject heading will be included in the study. Language is limited to English. Research selection, data extraction, and research quality assessment were independently completed by 2 researchers. CONCLUSIONS: MPFL reconstruction is a reliable technique for the treatment of patellofemoral instability. The Schöttle point is still the mainstream method for locating the femoral attachment, the patellar attachment for single-bundle is located at the junction of the proximal one third and the distal two third of the longitudinal axis of the patella. For double-bundles, one is located in the proximal one third of the medial patellar edge and another is in the center of the patellar edge. Meanwhile, the adjustment of graft tension during operation is very important.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.011 | 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".