MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319655778 · doi:10.1177/17531934231152592

Insights and trends review: artificial intelligence in hand surgery

2023· review· en· W4319655778 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

VenueJournal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersKing's College LondonKing's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
KeywordsMedicineUSableHand surgeryField (mathematics)Applications of artificial intelligenceReading (process)Scale (ratio)Key (lock)Data scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial intelligence (AI) in hand surgery is an emerging and evolving field that will likely play a large role in the future care of our patients. However, there remain several challenges to makes this technology meaningful, acceptable and usable at scale. In this review article, we discuss basic concepts in AI, including challenges and key considerations, provide an update on how AI is being used in hand and wrist surgery and propose potential future applications. The aims are to equip clinicians and researchers with the basic knowledge needed to understand and explore the incorporation of AI in hand surgery within their own practice and recommends further reading to develop knowledge in this emerging field.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.298
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.133 · 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