MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225725260 · doi:10.1302/3114-220967

The FAITH and HEALTH Trials: Are We Studying Different Hip Fracture Patient Populations?

2022· dataset· en· W4225725260 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthoMedia · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip and Femur Fractures
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthZonMwCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchAcumedAmgenMcMaster UniversityStrykerSanofi
KeywordsHip fractureFaithMedicinePsychologyInternal medicinePhilosophyEpistemologyOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Over the past decade, 2 randomized controlled trials were performed to evaluate 2 surgical strategies (internal fixation and arthroplasty) for the treatment of low-energy femoral neck fractures in patients aged $50 years.We evaluated whether patient populations in both the FAITH and HEALTH trials had different baseline characteristics and compared the displaced femoral neck fracture cohort from the FAITH trial to HEALTH trial patients.Methods: Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, and fracture characteristics from both trials were compared.FAITH trial patients with displaced fractures were then compared with HEALTH patients.T-tests and x 2 tests were performed to compare differences for sex, age, osteoporosis status, and ASA class. Results:The mean age of the 1079 FAITH trial patients was 72 versus 79 years for the 1441 HEALTH trial patients.HEALTH patients were older, mostly White, used more medication, and had more comorbidities than FAITH patients.Of the 1079 FAITH trial patients, 32% (346/1079) had displaced fractures.Their mean age was significantly lower than that of HEALTH patients (66 vs. 79 years; P , 0.001).HEALTH trial patients were significantly more

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)0.075
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.210
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0750.210
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthoMediaSame topicHip and Femur FracturesFrench-language works237,207