MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206035174 · doi:10.1115/1.4053594

The Utility of Quantitative Computed Tomography to Detect Differences in Subchondral Bone Mineral Density Between Healthy People and People With Pain Following Wrist Trauma

2022· article· en· W4206035174 on OpenAlexaff
Lauren Straatman, Nikolas K. Knowles, Nina Suh, David M. Walton, Emily Lalone

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsHand and Upper Limb ClinicUniversity of CalgaryWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWristQuantitative computed tomographyMedicineWrist painBone mineralSubchondral boneArticular surfaceComputed tomographyOrthodonticsRadiologyNuclear medicineAnatomyOsteoarthritisInternal medicineOsteoporosisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanisms underlying chronic pain development following musculoskeletal trauma are complex and multifactorial. In their search, some researchers are turning to the subchondral bone as a potential contributor to pain due to its vascularity, using a depth-specific imaging technique. However, this technique has been mainly used in the knee. We propose the use of a quantitative computed tomography (QCT) depth-specific analysis to measure subchondral bone following wrist trauma. Ten participants (n = 5 post-trauma; n = 5 healthy) underwent bilateral computed tomography scans of their wrist accompanied by a calibration phantom with known densities. Average subchondral volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) was studied at three depths from the subchondral surface (0-2.5, 2.5-5, 5-7.5 mm) according to radial articular surface contact in both wrists of each participant. Percentage differences and Cohen's d effect sizes were calculated to analyze bilateral vBMD and vBMD differences between groups. This image-based tool demonstrated subject-specific, depth-specific, and joint-specific measures of vBMD within the wrist. This methodology highlighted the differences between depth-specific vBMD in healthy people and people who have experienced wrist trauma. Overall, the healthy cohort demonstrated higher vBMD across all three depths and both articular surfaces. This imaging technique further distinguished between subchondral cortical and trabecular bones, wherein clinical implications can be drawn from these distinctions in future work. Our study therefore supports the utility of a QCT imaging technique in detecting differences in depth-specific vBMD in the wrist.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomechanical EngineeringSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207