Management of Displaced Midshaft Clavicle Fractures with Figure-of-Eight Bandage: The Impact of Residual Shortening on Shoulder Function
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures (MCFs) is still controversial. The aims of our study were to evaluate clinical and radiological outcomes and complications of patients with displaced MCFs managed nonoperatively and to identify potential predictive factors of worse clinical outcomes. Seventy-five patients with displaced MCFs were enrolled and treated nonoperatively with a figure-of-eight bandage (F8-B). Initial shortening (IS) and displacement (ID) of fragments were radiographically evaluated at the time of diagnosis and immediately after F8-B application by residual shortening (RS) and displacement (RD). The clavicle shortening ratio was evaluated clinically at last follow-up. Functional outcomes were assessed using Constant (CS), q-DASH, DASH work and DASH sport scores. Cosmetic outcomes and rate of complications were evaluated. Good to very good mid-term clinical results were achieved by using the institutional treatment protocol. Multiple regression identified RS as an independent predictor of shoulder function, while RD affects fracture healing. These findings support the efficacy of our institutional protocol and thus could be useful for orthopedic surgeons during the decision-making process.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it