MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407539154 · doi:10.1016/j.eats.2025.103453

Posterior Arthroscopic Anatomic Glenoid Reconstruction

2025· article· es· W4407539154 on OpenAlexaff
Liam Rappoldt, Felicia Licht, Cathy Coady, Ivan Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy Techniques · 2025
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityNova Scotia Health AuthorityNova Scotia Hospital
FundersAfghan-American Community OrganizationArkansas Arts Council
KeywordsMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Posterior bone loss following posterior instability of the shoulder can lead to poor patient outcomes and increased likelihood of subsequent dislocations. Unlike in cases of anterior instability, the critical amount of bone loss that warrants surgical intervention in posterior instability has not been established. Posterior instability and bone loss are commonly seen in traumatic settings where cumulative dislocations occur. Similar to surgical treatment of anterior instability, both arthroscopic and open procedures have been used, with the former gaining momentum as the preferred method. To address resultant bone loss, surgeons can use a variety of grafting techniques and sources for augmentation of the posterior glenoid deficit. Here we describe an adaptation of the arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction for posterior instability with bone loss using a distal tibia allograft. This arthroscopic technique allows for excellent surgical visualization, graft delivery, and anatomic reconstruction of the articular surface of the glenoid.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.325 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy TechniquesSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207