The Effect of Transverse Tibial Bone Transfer in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To analyse the effectiveness of performing a transverse tibial bone graft in the treatment of patients with diabetic foot. We retrospectively analysed the clinical details of 51 diabetic foot patients in our hospital from February 2023 to February 2024 and divided them into two groups according to the different treatment modalities, in which the control group received open debridement and the treatment group received transverse tibial bone transfer and compared the differences between the two groups. There were large differences in VAS score, Toronto Clinical Symptom Score, quality of life score, internal lumen diameter, blood flow velocity in the affected limb, perfusion volume, vascular endothelial growth factor, epidermal growth factor and CRP between the two groups after surgery (P < 0.05). Patients with diabetic foot should be treated with transverse tibial bone grafting, which is safer and more effective and can have a significant impact on improving the status of the affected limb, the inflammation and the patient’s quality of life.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".