The Morphology and Morphometric Analysis of the Radius Bone: A Study on Freshly Frozen Cadavers in the Indian Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The radial bone and the radioulnar joint are vital for the physiological and physical stability of the elbow. The prostheses and plates used in cases of radius fracture are designed based on the morphology of the Western population. This could result in a bone-implant mismatch when applied to the Indian population, resulting in complications. Hence, the study aimed to record the normal values of radius morphology in the Indian population. Methods A total of 30 (eight male and seven female) freshly frozen cadaveric bilateral upper limbs were chosen. Cadavers with previous surgical scars, deformities, and congenital defects of the upper limb were excluded. The radius was excised, and morphometric parameters were measured with a non-elastic measuring tape and a digital caliper and recorded using GeoGebra software. Results All measuring parameters exhibited no significant difference between the right and left side of the bone (p > 0.05), whereas the difference between males and females for most parameters was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The mean difference between the anteroposterior (AP) diameter and transverse diameter of the radial head for the study sample was 0.89 ± 0.06 mm. Thus, the AP diameter was 4% greater than the transverse diameter. The head of the radius was observed to be almost round. The degree of extent of the safe zone was 124.64°, with an average safe arc length of 3.27 ± 0.55 cm. Conclusion The morphometric measurements of the radius in the Indian population are different from the Western population.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".