MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321610874 · doi:10.1097/bot.0000000000002584

Management of Very Distal Ulna Fractures: A Systematic Review

2023· review· en· W4321610874 on OpenAlexaff
Hassaan Abdel Khalik, Darius L. Lameire, Colin Kruse, Philip Hache, Jamal Al‐Asiri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUlnaInternal fixationSurgeryReduction (mathematics)Confidence intervalRadiographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To synthesize all-cause complications and reoperations data, and secondary clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes after the management of very distal ulna fractures (VDUFs) either nonoperatively or operatively. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for English-language articles from inception to February 17, 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Studies reporting the nonoperative or operative management of VDUFs were eligible for inclusion. VDUFs were defined as either being Q2-Q5 distal ulna fractures using the OTA/AO Comprehensive Classification of Fractures for distal ulna fractures associated with distal radius fractures or being amenable to characterization by the classification system for ulnar head, neck and metaphyseal fractures by Biyani et al. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data from included studies. Study validity was assessed using the methodological index for nonrandomized studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seventeen studies (512 VDUFs) were included for analysis. There were 209, 237, and 66 fractures in the nonoperative, open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), and distal ulna resection groups, respectively. Descriptive statistics including weighted mean values, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of VDUFs with nonoperative management, ORIF, or distal ulna resection may all be acceptable treatment options in specific patient populations. Nonoperative management of VDUFs is a promising treatment strategy even for complex fracture patterns in patients 65 years of age or older. Despite higher reoperation rates, ORIF may be considered for the younger, high-demand patient. Distal ulna resection presents with very favorable functional outcomes in patients 65 years of age or older presenting with a complex VDUF with the lowest reoperation rate across all groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.007
Bibliometrics0.0140.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Orthopaedic TraumaSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207