MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394761013 · doi:10.3205/iprs000183

Subtotal diaphyseal replacement of the femur with modular mega-endoprosthesis following interprosthetic fracture. A case report

2024· article· en· W4394761013 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohamed Ghanem, Christina Pempe, Andreas Röth

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeriprostheticSurgeryWOMACImplantOsteoarthritisArthroplasty

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mega-endoprostheses enable wide management options in the treatment of primary and periprosthetic fracture of the lower extremities. In this study, we report on the use of custom-made subtotal diaphyseal endoprosthetic replacement in treatment of interprosthetic femoral fracture. This procedure is off-label, but in this particular case, it was the safest and most stress-stable treatment option. The implant was delivered within three weeks. The surgical procedure for subtotal replacement of the femoral diaphysis was performed without any intra- or postoperative complication. The duration for the surgical intervention was one hour and 40 minutes. The patient was then mobilized with full weight bearing. At one-year follow-up, the patient did not complain of any pain. The Harris Hip Score HHS improved from 26 to 83 at one-year follow-up, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index WOMAC improved from 88 to 16. Mega-endoprostheses enable a wide range of management options in the treatment of primary, peri- and interprosthetic fractures of the lower extremities. In many cases, an individual therapeutic plan is necessary ranging up to the use of custom-made implants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty→French-language works237,207→