Comparison of Functional Outcome in Osteosarcoma of Distal Femur and Proximal Tibia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limb-saving therapy for primary bone tumours is the treatment of choice. We aimed at analysing the quality of life of this group of patients by combining three different tools. Thirteen patients with a primary bone tumour of the extremity, 5 patients with osteosarcoma of proximal tibia and 8 with osteosarcoma of distal femur who had undergone endoprosthetic reconstruction between 2017-2018 were included in this retrospective study. Parallel recording of the MSTS score, TESS and SF-36 provides a better measure reflecting the complex situation of the patients by combining objective and subjective parameters. Keywords: MSTS-Musculoskeletal Tumour Society Score, TESS-Toronto Extremity Salvage Scoring System, SF-36Short Form -36 Questionnaire, EA-emotional acceptance, FA-overall function., PF- physical functioning, RLPH-role limitation due to physical health, RLEP- role limitation due to emotional health, E-energy, EWB-emotional wellbeing, SF- social functioning, P-pain, GH-general health, HC-health change
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".