MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402096467 · doi:10.1016/j.jseint.2024.08.193

Analysis of healthy glenohumeral arthrokinematics using four-dimensional computed tomography throughout internal rotation and forward elevation

2024· article· en· W4402096467 on OpenAlexaff
Kylie K. Paliani, James C. Hunter, James A. Johnson, Ting‐Yim Lee, George S. Athwal, Emily Lalone

Bibliographic record

VenueJSES International · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsSt Joseph's Health CareHand and Upper Limb ClinicWestern University
FundersStryker
KeywordsComputed tomographyElevation (ballistics)Internal rotationRotation (mathematics)MedicineGeologyOrthodonticsGeodesyNuclear medicineMathematicsRadiologyGeometryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The glenohumeral (GH) joint is the most mobile joint in the human body and can translate, as well as rotate in its socket. Currently, it is not well established in literature how much the healthy humeral head translates, and how that changes overtime as people age. The objective of this study is to quantify GH joint proximity and translation in healthy participants and determine if there are any age-related, position-related, or direction-related differences. Methods: Thirty-one participants were recruited for this study and split into 2 cohorts: young (aged ≤ 37 years) and old (aged ≥ 45 years). Four-dimensional computed tomography scans were taken as these participants completed internal rotation (IR) to the back and forward elevation. Three-dimensional bone models of the humerus and scapula were created using 3D Slicer. An interbone distance algorithm and an iterative closest point algorithm were used to determine GH joint proximity and translation, respectively. Results: This study found that older participants displayed significantly closer joint proximity (63% of glenoid surface was within 4 mm of humeral head) during the middle of IR, compared to younger participants (52% of glenoid surface within 4 mm of humeral head). Additionally, younger participants had significantly more translation in the superior/inferior direction (16% of glenoid height) compared to the anterior/posterior direction (10% of glenoid width) throughout IR. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the significance of translational movements within the GH joint throughout IR and forward elevation, which will aid implant manufacturers in designing implants that will allow for more normalized GH translations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.759
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJSES InternationalSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207