MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415487551 · doi:10.1055/s-0045-1812454

Hip morphology, clinical tests and pain in patients with FAI syndrome: what matters?

2025· article· W4415487551 on OpenAlexaff
Rahel Caliesch, David Beckwée, Jan Taeymans, Jan M. Schwab, Moritz Tannast, Julian Hirt, Jose A. Roshardt, Roger Hilfiker

Bibliographic record

Venuephysioscience · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCanadian Physiotherapy Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHip painFemoroacetabular impingementBack painTest (biology)MEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), characterized by cam and pincer morphologies, is a common source of hip pain. Understanding the relationships between hip morphology, clinical test outcomes, and pain severity is critical for improving FAI diagnosis and management. This study investigated correlations between cam signs, alpha angle, pincer/retroversion signs, lateral center-edge (LCE) angle, clinical tests, and pain in patients with FAI syndrome. Methods We analysed hip-level data from 51 hips (40 adults) with symptomatic cam and/or pincer morphologies, confirmed by both radiographs and MRI. Participants were physically active (sport≥2–3×/week). Cam, global pincer, and global retroversion signs were counted and measured. Nine clinical pain provocation tests were performed, and pain was measured using the i-HOT pain score. Spearman’s rank correlations (ρ) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using pairwise deletion and cluster-robust standard errors to account for within-patient hip clustering. Monotonicity was confirmed. Analyses were conducted in R (version 4.3.2). Results The number of cam signs, alpha angle, as well as the number of pincer/retroversion signs showed no or small and non-significant correlations (ρ=0, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.27; ρ=0.23, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.48; ρ=-0.15, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.13, respectively), whereas LCE angle had a moderate and statistically significant correlation with clinical tests (ρ=0.3, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.54). Clinical tests themselves were strongly and statistically significantly correlated with pain (ρ=0.57, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.73). The number of cam signs (ρ=0.1, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.37), alpha angle (ρ=-0.13, 95% CI -0.4 to 0.15), the number of pincer/retroversion signs (ρ=0.2, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.46), and LCE angle (ρ=-0.23, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.06) showed no notable and non-significant correlations with pain. Conclusions Clinical tests were moderately to strongly correlated with pain. Radiological signs showed negligible to small associations with clinical tests and pain. Wide confidence intervals suggest considerable uncertainty, indicating that morphological severity alone may have limited clinical relevance. These findings suggest that, in addition to morphological alterations, joint movement toward impingement may contribute to symptom generation. Publication History Article published online: 23 October 2025 © 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

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)0.009
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venuephysioscienceSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207