MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212874492 · doi:10.1097/bpo.0000000000002119

Dynamic Supination in Congenital Clubfoot: A Modified Delphi Panel Approach to Standardizing Definitions and Indications for Treatment

2022· article· en· W4212874492 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelphi methodDelphiMEDLINECongenital disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dynamic supination is a well-recognized cause of congenital clubfoot deformity relapse. However, there is no consensus on how to diagnose it and there are varied approaches in its management. This study aims to define dynamic supination and indications for treatment by presenting consensus from an international panel of experts using a modified Delphi panel approach. METHODS: An international panel of 15 pediatric orthopaedic surgeons with clinical and research expertise in childhood foot disorders participated in a modified Delphi panel on dynamic supination in congenital clubfoot. Panelists voted on 51 statements using a 4-point Likert scale on dynamic supination, clinical indications for treatment, operative techniques, and postoperative casting and bracing. All panelists participated in 2 voting rounds with an interim meeting for discussion. Responses were classified as unanimous consensus (100%), consensus (80% or above), near-consensus (70% to 79%), and indeterminate (69% or less). RESULTS: Consensus was achieved for 34 of 51 statements. Panelists agreed dynamic supination is present when the forefoot is supinated during swing phase of gait with initial contact on the lateral border of the foot. There was also agreement that dynamic supination results from muscle imbalance between the tibialis anterior and the peroneus longus and brevis. There was no consensus on observation of hindfoot varus in dynamic supination, operative indications for posterior release of the ankle joint, or incisional approach for tibialis anterior tendon transfer. Reference to the calcaneopedal unit concept, planes of movement, and phases of gait were deemed important factors for consideration when evaluating dynamic supination. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus statements from the Delphi panel can guide diagnosis and treatment of dynamic supination in clubfoot deformity relapse, including clinical decision making regarding preoperative casting, surgical approach, and postoperative immobilization. Near-consensus and indeterminate statements may be used to direct future areas of investigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

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)0.001
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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric OrthopaedicsSame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207