Return to play after conservative treatment of complete adductor longus tendon rupture in a semi-professional football player: a case report with a 1-year follow up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This case report details the conservative management of a complete adductor longus tendon tear in a semi-professional forward footballer. The injury occurred while reaching for the ball with the uninjured limb, with the injured limb in closed kinetic chain. After confirming the injury severity with a magnetic resonance scan, the medical team opted for a conservative approach due to the small tendon retraction. Treatment was based on task progression, ensuring the player could complete exercises with tolerated pain. Rehabilitation consisted of unsupervised gym and on-field exercises progressed separately, including overall strength, mobility, adductor strength, balance, plyometrics, running, kicking and small-sided games. Additionally, pain during the squeeze test and eccentric adduction strength were assessed at different points. The player returned to play 96 days after the injury and has remained active since. The framework supported a safe return to play without surgery or the need for supervised rehabilitation sessions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".