Tennis Elbow: Subject Matter of Concern
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lateral epicondylitis (Tennis Elbow) is a frequently reported medical condition. Its results in considerable morbility and financial cost. The syndrome is seen mainly in those whose work involves repetitive movements of forearm and hand. It is reported that 7.4% of industrial workers and 40-50% of tennis players in USA are at some time affected by it. In 1981, over 1500 workers in Quebec made claims to the workers compensation board for this condition, generating a cost of 4442 canadian dollar per case and an average of 62 days of work lost. The statistics is provided by 1982, Province of Quebec, workman`s compensation board. Its treatment includes NSAIDS, many physiotherapy techniques, cost immobilization, orthosis, surgical operations and less conventional methods such as radiotherapy, acupuncture and vitamins. The aim of this article is to review the current literature, anatomy, sports specific biomechanics, physical examination, causes, types and rehabiliatation of lateral epicondylitis follow up and prevention. © 2011 IGJPS. All rights reserved.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.013 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".