ASSESSMENT OF HIP FRACTURE RISK IN OLDER ADULTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hip fractures in older adults have severe effects on patients’ morbidity as well as mortality, so it is crucial to avoid this injury through the early identification of patients at high risk. Currently, the diagnosis of osteoporosis and consequently hip fracture risk is done through the measurement of bone mineral density by a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan. However, studies show that this method is not accurate enough, and a high percentage of patients who sustain a hip fracture had non-osteoporotic DXA scans less than a year before the incidence. In this research, to enhance the hip fracture risk prediction, the effect of a femur’s geometry and bone mineral density distribution was considered in the hip fracture risk estimation. This was done through 2D and 3D statistical shape and appearance modeling of the proximal femur using standard clinical DXA scans. To assess the proposed techniques, destructive mechanical tests were performed on 16 isolated cadaveric femurs. Also, through collaboration with the Canadian Osteoporosis Study (CaMos), the proposed statistical techniques to predict the hip fracture risk were evaluated in a clinical population as well. The results of this study showed that new techniques can enhance hip fracture risk estimation; in the clinical study, 2D and 3D statistical modeling were able to improve identifying patients at high risk by 40% and 44% over the clinical standard method. Also, the percentage of correct predictions using 2D statistical models did not differ significantly from the 3D predictions. Therefore, by applying these techniques in clinical practice it could be possible to identify patients at high risk of sustaining a hip fracture more accurately and eventually reduce the incidence of hip fractures and the pain and social and economic burden that comes with it.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".