MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403280236 · doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-23-01059

New Technologies in the Treatment of Base of Thumb Osteoarthritis

2024· article· en· W4403280236 on OpenAlexaff
Gilad Rotem, Assaf Kadar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareHand and Upper Limb Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisThumbArthroplastyLigamentTendonSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) of the first carpometacarpal (CMC) joint is prevalent and debilitating, commonly affecting the elderly and postmenopausal population. This review highlights the latest advancements in the treatment of thumb CMC OA, which historically includes a range of nonsurgical and surgical options without a consensus benchmark. We will focus on innovative and emerging technologies. Nonsurgical treatments typically comprise custom braces and corticosteroid injections. In addition, this review explores advanced approaches such as 3D printed braces, which have improved patient satisfaction, and novel intra-articular injectables such as autologous fat, optimized by ultrasonography to enhance treatment precision and outcomes. Although standard surgical treatments include trapeziectomy, with or without ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition, more recent implant arthroplasty designs show promising long-term survival. Newer interventions include patient-specific instrumentation for metacarpal osteotomies, selective joint denervation, and innovative suspensionplasty devices, all marked by their increased precision and personalized care. However, it is important to note that these novel technologies are not yet established as superior to standard treatments of thumb CMC OA.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.300
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic SurgeonsSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207