MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362453077 · doi:10.26603/001c.73314

Diagnostic Imaging for Distal Extremity Injuries in Direct Access Physical Therapy: An Observational Study

2023· article· en· W4362453077 on OpenAlex
Michael S. Crowell, John S. Mason, Jamie Morris, Max K Dummar, Paul A Kuwik

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Physical Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnkleMedicineWristPhysical examinationPhysical therapyFoot (prosody)CohortPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Military physical therapists practicing direct-access routinely utilize diagnostic imaging and numerous published case reports demonstrate the ability of physical therapists to diagnose and appropriately disposition patients with foot/ankle and wrist/hand fractures. However, no larger cohort studies have explored the utilization of diagnostic imaging by physical therapists to detect fractures. Hypothesis/Purpose: To describe the utilization of diagnostic imaging in foot/ankle and wrist/hand injuries by physical therapists in a direct-access sports physical therapy clinic. Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Methods: The Agfa Impax Client 6 image viewing software (IMPAX) was searched from 2014 to 2018 for patients with diagnostic imaging ordered for foot/ankle and wrist/hand injuries. The Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA) electronic medical record was independently reviewed by the principal and co-investigator physical therapists. Data extracted were demographics and elements from the patient history and physical examination. Results: In foot/ankle injuries, physical therapists diagnosed a fracture in 16% of the 177 cases and waited for an average of 3.9 days and 1.3 visits before ordering imaging. In wrist/hand injuries, physical therapists diagnosed a fracture in 24% of the 178 cases and waited for an average of 3.7 days and 1.2 visits before ordering imaging. The time to definitive care from the initial physical therapy evaluation was significantly different (p = 0.04) for foot/ankle fractures (0.6 days) compared to wrist/hand fractures (5.0 days). The Ottawa Ankle Rules demonstrated a negative likelihood ratio (-LR) of 0.11 (0.02, 0.72) and a positive likelihood ratio (+LR) of 1.99 (1.62, 2.44) for the diagnosis of foot/ankle fracture. Conclusions: Physical therapists utilizing diagnostic imaging in a direct-access sports physical therapy clinic diagnosed fractures in similar proportions for foot/ankle and wrist/hand injuries and quickly dispositioned patients to definitive care for those fractures. The diagnostic accuracy of the Ottawa Ankle Rules was similar to previously reported values. Level of Evidence: Level 3.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.330 · 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