MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

RELATION BETWEEN Q-ANGLE AND CLINICAL, RADIOGRAPHIC AND ULTRASONOGRAPHIC FINDINGS IN FEMALE PATIENTS WITH SYMPTOMATIC PRIMARY KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS

2021· article· en· W4242527435 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maha Sharaf Eldeen

Bibliographic record

VenueALEXMED ePosters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisRadiographyMedicineRadiologyOrthodonticsKnee JointSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Q-Angle is an important biomechanical factor in assessing the knee joint function. Primary knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is more common in females owing to many factors including increased Q-Angle. Studying the complex biomechanics of the knee joint is essential to diagnose and hence properly treating joint pathology conservatively. Aim of the workThe aim of this work was to study the relation between Q-Angle and clinical, radiographic and musculoskeletal ultrasonographic (US) findings in female patients with symptomatic primary KOA.Patients and Methods:This study had included twenty-five female patients with a mean age of 55.7±4.01 years ranged from 47 to 62 years, collected between June 2018 and October 2019, fulfilling the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for KOA. Patients were clinically assessed with calculation of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis (WOMAC) index as a functional score. They underwent knee musculoskeletal US examination for evaluation of medial, lateral and inter-condylar distal femoral cartilage thickness and grading. Also conventional radiography of knees were scored using the Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grading scale. Spearman’s rho was used to assess the association between Q-Angle value and clinical, functional, radiographic and US findings.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueALEXMED ePosters→Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→