MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400085719 · doi:10.5604/01.3001.0054.6547

Arthroscopy-assisted Minimally Invasive Tarsometatarsal and Lisfranc Arthrodesis. A Case Series

2024· article· en· W4400085719 on OpenAlexaff
Chayanin Angthong, Prasit Rajbhandari, Andrea Veljkovic

Bibliographic record

VenueOrtopedia Traumatologia Rehabilitacja · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTarsometatarsal jointsArthrodesisArthroscopyInvasive surgerySurgeryRadiographyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: First tarsometatarsal arthrodesis is an effective procedure for the correction of hallux valgus deformities. Traditionally, first to third tarsometatarsal and Lisfranc arthrodesis is performed via an open approach. Little is known about the role of combined arthroscopic and minimally invasive techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We present a case series of complicated hallux valgus deformities and other conditions managed using arthroscopically assisted minimally invasive arthrodesis. We first performed a minimally invasive surgical procedure that allowed easy and unhindered access for the introduction of an arthroscopic instrument over the joint surface. RESULTS: The mean Visual Analogue Score - Foot and Ankle and Short Form-36 scores indicated satisfactory and acceptable postoperative outcomes, respectively. The mean patient satisfaction score was 94.44 and the mean follow-up duration was approximately 17.7 months. CONCLUSION: The described procedure has been preliminarily shown to be useful in terms of its minimal invasiveness, reproducibility, safety, and effectiveness.

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 venueOrtopedia Traumatologia RehabilitacjaSame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207