MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409833089 · doi:10.1016/j.jht.2025.02.005

A case report of recurrent annular ligament displacement in a pediatric patient

2025· article· en· W4409833089 on OpenAlexaff
Cameron Van Oort

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hand Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElbow and Forearm Trauma Treatment
Canadian institutionsCanadian Physiotherapy Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisplacement (psychology)MedicineOrthodonticsLigamentSurgeryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Annular ligament displacement (ALD) is a common pediatric condition whereby the annular ligament slips over the radius and remains trapped between the radial head and capitellum. It can be reduced with relative ease by performing passive pronation or supination with concomitant pressure over the radial head. However, ALD is more likely to recur after the initial incident, concerning for both the patient and caregivers. PURPOSE: This article describes the successful conservative management of a 2 year, 4 month old female patient with recurrent ALD, having occurred six times in an 8 month period. METHODS: The role of an orthosis, targeted exercises, and education for caregivers for treating recurrent ALD is discussed. RESULTS: At each follow up and final 18 month follow up no ALD events had occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Previous literature discussing treatment for recurrent ALD has examined teaching caregivers to reduce the elbow at home or teaching reductions via telehealth. However, there is a dearth of research around treating the issue so recurrence does not occur. This conservative intervention demonstrates a potential avenue for treating chronic recurrent ALD to eliminate subsequent events.

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)0.006
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0070.005
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 head0.304
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hand TherapySame topicElbow and Forearm Trauma TreatmentFrench-language works237,207