[Effect of proximal fibula osteotomy on tension of lateral knee soft tissue in patients with knee osteoarthritis].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the short-term efficacy of proximal fibula osteotomy in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, and to analyze the effect of osteotomy on the tension of the lateral knee soft tissue of patients and verify the reliability of the Arch string theory. METHODS: A total of 71 patients with varus knee osteoarthritis from December 2019 to March 2022 were included, 3 patients dropped out, and 68 patients completed all trials, collected 27 males and 41 females, aged from 51 to 79 years old, with an average of (68.0±7.0 ) years old. The follow-up time ranged from 4 to 12 weeks, with an average of (3.76±1.94) weeks. After admission, the patient underwent Proximal fibula osteotomy, and the tension of lateral knee soft tissue, visual analogue scale (VAS) of pain, the western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and other indicators were recorded before surgery and 1 month after surgery in the weight-bearing state. RESULTS: <0.001). CONCLUSION: Proximal fibula osteotomy is safe and effective in the treatment of varus knee osteoarthritis in the short term. One month after osteotomy, the tension of lateral knee soft tissue increases under weight-bearing state, but the long-term changes still need further observation and follow-up.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".