ЭФФЕКТИВНОСТЬ КОМПЬЮТЕРНОЙ ТЕХНОЛОГИИ ПРИ ТОТАЛЬНОМ ЭНДОПРОТЕЗИРОВАНИИ КОЛЕННОГО СУСТАВА
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the treatment outcomes in 124 patients (102 women and 22 men) aged 51 to 83 years (median 69 [65; 76] years) on 124 knee joints. Patients were divided into 2 groups: the study group – 62 people aged 51 to 83 years (median – 69.1 [64;74] years), who used computer navigation, and the comparison group – 62 people aged 56 to 83 years (median 69 [65;78] years), in which surgical in-tervention was performed according to the standard technique. Long-term results were studied in terms of 3 to 36 months. During the examination, the deformity variant was determined, radiometric parameters of the knee joints were measured using the Knee Society Score (KSS), Functional Knee Society Score (FKSS), and Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scales. Also, functional stress tests were performed to assess the stability of the knee joint in the frontal plane and functional indicators of the range of motion. After surgery, in the study group, the WOMAC values decreased by 5.90 times and the median value to 11 [8;15] points (p < 0.001), in the comparison group they decreased by 4.81 times to 13.5 [8;16] points (p < 0.001), KSS in-creased by 3.88 times. Median KSS in the study group increased 3.91 times and reached 86 [84;95] points (p < 0.001), in the comparison group it increased 3.86 times only to 85 [77;95] points (p < 0.001). FKSS data increased by 1.75 times. The median FKSS in the study group increased 2.08 times and reached 94 [85;99] points (p < 0.001), in the comparison group it increased 1.60 times only to 93 [83;95] points (p < 0.001).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".