MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4282839296 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1651398/v1

Reproducibility and Repeatability of a Semi-Automated Pipeline to Quantify Trapeziometacarpal Joint Angles Using Dynamic Computed Tomography

2022· preprint· en· W4282839296 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael T. Kuczynski, Kendra Wang, Justin J. Tse, Tomasz Bugajski, Sarah L. Manske

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Calgary
FundersArthritis SocietyUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsReproducibilityRepeatabilityJoint (building)Intraclass correlationCadaveric spasmComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringMathematicsMedicineAnatomyEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The trapeziometacarpal (TMC) joint is a mechanically complex joint and is commonly affected by musculoskeletal diseases such as osteoarthritis. Quantifying in vivo TMC joint biomechanics, such as joint angles, with traditional reflective marker-based methods can be difficult due to the joint’s location in the hand. Dynamic computed tomography (CT) can facilitate the quantification of TMC joint angles by continuously capturing three-dimensional volumes over time. However, post-processing of dynamic CT datasets can be time intensive and automated methods are needed to reduce processing times to allow for application to larger clinical studies. The purpose of this work is to introduce a fast, semi-automated pipeline to quantify joint angles from dynamic CT scans of the TMC joint and evaluate the associated error in joint angle computation by means of a reproducibility and repeatability study. Methods Ten cadaveric hands were scanned with dynamic CT using a passive motion device to move thumbs in a radial abduction-adduction motion. Static CT scans and high-resolution peripheral quantitative CT scans were also acquired to generate high-resolution bone meshes. Abduction-adduction, flexion-extension, and axial rotation angles were computed using a joint coordinate system. Reproducibility and repeatability were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients, Bland-Altman analysis, and root mean square errors. Target registration errors were computed to evaluate errors associated with image registration. Results Repeatability was found to be moderate to excellent for flexion-extension and abduction-adduction, and poor to excellent for axial rotation. Reproducibility was poor to excellent for all three angles. Specimens with greater joint degeneration had lower repeatability and reproducibility. We found that the difference in resulting joint angles were likely due to differences in segment coordinate system definition between multiple raters, rather than due to registration errors. Conclusions The proposed semi-automatic processing pipeline was fast, repeatable, and moderately reproducible when quantifying TMC joint angles. This work provides a range of errors for TMC joint angles from dynamic CT scans using manually selected anatomical landmarks.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→