Treatment of Juvenile Hallux Valgus with a Simple, Effective, Rapid, and Inexpensive (SERI) technique: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Juvenile hallux valgus presents pediatric challenges ranging from cosmetic to functional issues, with multiple surgical management strategies reported. The simple, effective, rapid, and inexpensive (SERI) technique has gained attention for its potential to offer effective correction with minimal complications. Its effectiveness in younger patients is still uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the outcomes of SERI in treating Juvenile hallux valgus. Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL Complete, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched from inception to April 5, 2024, for studies on SERI outcomes in JHV. Following the PRISMA/R-AMSTAR guidelines and Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, studies were screened, and data were collected on demographics, radiographic measurements, patient-reported outcomes, and complications. A meta-analysis using random-effects models to estimate study weights was performed. Five studies comprising 153 patients (208 feet) treated with SERI met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 14.6 (±4.3) years; with 80 % female patients and a mean follow-up of 43 months. Postoperative mean hallux valgus angle improved from 26.1° (±4.8) to 10.5°(±3.5), intermetatarsal angle from 14.2° (±0.6) to 6.8 (±1.7), and distal metatarsal articular angle from 12.4° (±5.9) to 4.9° (±3.1). The American Orthopedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores achieved the minimal clinically important difference in all studies. Minor complications were documented without significant long-term effects. The SERI technique appears effective and safe for treating juvenile hallux valgus, leading to significant improvements in radiographic measurements and patient outcomes. LEVEL OF CLINICAL EVIDENCE: Level 3.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.033 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".