MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409971306 · doi:10.4103/ijpmr.ijpmr_54_24

Symptomatic Improvement after Proximal Fibular Osteotomy in Osteoarthritis Knee: A Reality Check with Follow-up Series

2025· article· en· W4409971306 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anurug Biswas, Anil Kumar Gupta, Sanjay Pandey

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisMedicineReality checkSeries (stratigraphy)OsteotomySurgeryHigh tibial osteotomyOrthodonticsPathologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Proximal fibular osteotomy (PFO) is newer and relatively less invasive surgery that is effective for symptomatic relief in medial compartment knee osteoarthritis. Most of the studies include short follow-up. Hence, the long-term effect of PFO is still not well established. In this series, authors described 16 patients who underwent PFO and followed up until 5 years. Response was noted in the Numeric Pain Rating Scale and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scale at pre-operative assessment, 1 month, 1 year and 5 years. PFO provided very good symptomatic relief for initial one year, but after that, the beneficial effect of PFO reaches at plateau. For few of the cases, symptoms even got worsen after one year. Only two patients out of 16 had sustained symptomatic improvement in 5 th year. This series reflects the opposite result to most of the available literature regarding symptomatic relief following PFO. For shorter period, PFO is proven to be beneficial, but its long-term effect is still debatable.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation→Same topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes→French-language works237,207→