MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4224046376 · doi:10.53350/pjmhs22162882

Anatomical Variations of the Suprascapular Notch and Its Importance in Nerve Entrapment

2022· article· en· W4224046376 on OpenAlexaff
Adnan Badar, Salman Yunas, Atif Hussain, Sadaf Shaheen, Abdul Rashid Baloch, Abdul Hafeez Baloch

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsAbbott (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuprascapular nerveMedicineAnatomyForamenBrachial plexus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Aim: Entrapped neuropathy syndrome could be effectively managed with detailed anatomical knowledge of suprascapular notch. Suprascapular nerve injuries are now widely acknowledged as a cause of shoulder pain and dysfunction. The present study aimed to determine the anatomical variation of the suprascapular notch and its importance in nerve entrapment. Methodology: A total of 128 human scapulae of either gender were taken from the department of Anatomy, Saidu Group of Teaching Hospitals, Swat and Women Medical and Dental College Hospital Abbottabad during the period from January to June, 2021. Four parameters of Suprascapular notch (SSN) i) Superior transverse depth (STD), ii) Maximum depth (MD), iii) middle transverse diameter (MTD), and total circumferential diameter (TCD) were defined based on incisura inferior border shape and vertical diameters. Suprascapular notch presence or absence was grossly examined for all the scapulae. Vernier caliper was used for the measurement of the four suprascapular notch parameters. SPSS version 23 was used for data analysis. Results: Out of 128, 61 (47.7%) were right-sided and 67 (52.3%) were left-sided human scapulae. The prevalence of U-shaped, V-shaped, and J-shaped notch were 62 (48.4%), 27 (21.1%), and 13 (10.2%) respectively. The incidence of the large double foramen, complete, and incomplete suprascapular notch were 2 (1.6%), 7 (5.5%), and 8 (6.3%) respectively. W-notched was present in 3 (2.3%) scapulae whereas 6 (4.7%) scapulae had no notch. The vertical and transverse diameters for right and left-sided type-II scapulae were 4.9±2.1 mm and 8.9±3.1 mm and 4.8±1.7 mm and 9.1±2.3 mm respectively. Conclusion: The prevalence of U-shaped and V-shaped notch was 48.4% and 21.1% respectively. Suprascapular notch morphology could be determined with anatomical knowledge and play a critical role for neurosurgeons, clinicians, orthopedic surgeons, and radiologists for proper diagnosis and management of shoulder region surgical procedure and protocol. Keywords: Suprascapular notch, Anatomical knowledge, Nerve entrapment

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicShoulder Injury and Treatment→French-language works237,207→