Orientation of the Scapula in the Standing Position
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: A new ultrasound-based device is proposed to non-invasively measure the orientation of the scapula in the standing position to consider this parameter for Total Shoulder Arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy and reliability of this device. METHODS: Accuracy was assessed by comparing measurements made with the ultrasound device to those acquired with a three-dimensional (3D) optical localization system (Northern Digital, Canada) on a dedicated mechanical phantom. Three users performed 10 measurements on three healthy volunteers with different body mass (BMI) indices to analyze the reliability of the device by measuring the intra and interobserver variabilities. RESULTS: The mean accuracy of the device was 0.9°± 0.7 (0.01-3.03), 1.3°± 0.8 (0.03-4.55), 1.9°± 1.5 (0.05-5.76), respectively, in the axial, coronal, and sagittal planes. The interobserver and intraobserver variabilities were excellent whatever the BMI and the users experience. CONCLUSIONS: The device is accurate and reliable enough for the measurement of the scapula orientation in the standing position.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".