Fig. 1 918 THE JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY GLOVE PERFORATION DURING HIP ARTHROPLASTY A RANDOMISED
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exposure to blood is a hazard for all surgeons. We assessed the incidence of glove perforation and needlestick injury from a new blunt taperpoint needle designed to penetrate tissues other than skin with the minimum of force. We performed a prospective, randomised trial comparing the incidence of perforations of surgical gloves with the new needle and a standard cutting needle during wound closure after hip arthroplasties. There was at least one glove perforation in 46 of 69 such procedures (67%). The use of the taperpoint needle produced a significant decrease in perforations(p = 0.049). J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1993; 75-B:918-20. Vaccination against hepatitis B virus is now available, but only 60 % of surgeons are reported to be immunised (Berridge et al 1990; Brignall and Moran 1991). There is no vaccination against the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV); emphasis must continue to be on protection against contamination. Needlestick injuries are the most common source of blood contamination during surgery (Brough, Hunt and Barrie 1988; Hussain, Latif and
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.136 | 0.011 |
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".