Elevated Body Mass Index Negatively Impacts Recovery of Shoulder Abduction Strength in Triceps Motor Branch to Axillary Nerve Transfers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The purpose of this work was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of triceps motor branch to axillary nerve transfers and to identify prognostic factors which may influence these outcomes. Methods: A retrospective cohort included all patients who underwent a triceps motor branch to axillary nerve transfer (2010-2019) with at least 12 months of follow-up. The primary outcome measure was shoulder abduction strength assessed with British Medical Research Council (MRC) grade. Results: Ten patients were included with a mean follow-up of 19.1 (SD 5.9) months. Compared with preoperative MRC shoulder abduction strength (0.2 SD 0.4), patients significantly improved postoperatively (2.8 SD 1.6; P = .005). Increased body mass index (BMI) was significantly associated with worse postoperative MRC ( P = .014). Conclusion: Triceps motor branch to axillary nerve transfer is a beneficial procedure for restoring shoulder function in patients presenting with either isolated axillary nerve or brachial plexus pathology. Patients with elevated BMI may not have as robust strength recovery and should be counseled carefully regarding prognosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".