Cup placement in primary total hip arthroplasty: how to get it right without navigation or robotics
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
Acetabular component orientation and position are important factors in the short- and long-term outcomes of total hip arthroplasty. Different definitions of inclination and anteversion are used in the orthopaedic literature and surgeons should be aware of these differences and understand their relationships. There is no universal safe zone. Preoperative planning should be used to determine the optimum position and orientation of the cup and assess spinopelvic characteristics to adjust cup orientation accordingly. A peripheral reaming technique leads to a more accurate restoration of the centre of rotation with less variability compared with a standard reaming technique. Several intraoperative landmarks can be used to control the version of the cup, the most commonly used and studied is the transverse acetabular ligament. The use of an inclinometer reduces the variability associated with the use of freehand or mechanical alignment guides.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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