MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297880320 · doi:10.1016/j.eats.2022.05.006

Anterior Closing‐Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy Using Patient‐Specific Cutting Guide in Chronic Anterior Cruciate Ligament–Deficient Knees

2022· article· en· W4297880320 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy Techniques · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh tibial osteotomyMedicineAnterior cruciate ligamentFluoroscopySurgeryOsteotomyAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionOrthodonticsOsteoarthritis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An increased posterior tibial slope has been identified as an independent risk factor for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft rupture, with a critical threshold of 12°. Surgical slope correction by anterior closing wedge (ACW)-high tibial osteotomy (HTO) can reduce ACL force and anterior tibial translation with good clinical outcomes when combined with revision ACL reconstruction. Performing ACW-HTO preserving the tibial tubercule can be challenging for inexperienced surgeons. Patient-specific cutting guides have been shown to be effective in facilitating the surgeon's learning curve in medial opening wedge-HTO by reducing operative time and the use of fluoroscopy as well as decreasing anxiety. The present technique describes a retro-tibial tubercule ACW-HTO using a patient-specific cutting guide.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.286 · 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