MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117890242 · doi:10.26603/001c.153965

Comparing Quantification Methodologies for the Single-Leg Heel-Rise in Patients Following Operative and Non-Operative Management for Achilles Tendon Rupture

2025· article· en· W7117890242 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca Franklin, Josh Garofalo, Sophie Zhu, Monther Abuhantash, Sheila McRae, Robert Longstaffe, Dan Ogborn

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Physical Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaPan Am Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAchilles tendon ruptureAchilles tendonMEDLINEComplicationAnkle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The Single-Leg Heel-Rise test (SLHR) is commonly used to determine the functional status of patients following Achilles tendon rupture (ATR). Several methods exist to quantify performance variables during the SLHR including repetition counting, linear position transducers (LPT) and motion capture/analysis systems; however, they have not been directly compared following operative or non-operative management of ATR. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare three methods to quantify repetition number, heel-rise height, and total work during the SLHR test in patients managed either operatively or non-operatively for ATR. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Twenty-four patients who underwent either operative or nonoperative treatment for complete ATR completed SLHR to failure on a 10° angle board. LPT, two-dimensional motion capture, and the Calf Raise smartphone application recorded heel-rise repetitions and height. Intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots (95% limits of agreement) compared devices. Work was reported as absolute values and limb symmetry index. Two-way analyses of variance were completed for all variables. Results: In this sample of 17 males and 7 females (operative [n=12; 39.0±8.9 years; 9 male] and non-operative [n=12; 46.2±14.1 years; 8 male] groups) strong, positive correlations were demonstrated between all devices, with the highest occurring between motion capture and the app (r2 =0.997). Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement showed wide limits of agreement across all methods. Peak and accumulated heel-rise height was reduced on the affected limb when measured by all devices, translating to reduced affected limb total work (mean difference: motion capture -403.5 Joules [J] (95%CI -41.5-902.6), app -434.7 J (95%CI -924.3-54.8), and LPT -370.4 J (95%CI -802.6-61.9). Conclusion: LPT, motion capture, and the calf raise app can be used to quantify repetitions, work, and heel-rise height in patients following ATR. However, device values should not be used interchangeably due to wide limits of agreement across methodologies. Level of Evidence: Level 2c.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 teacher head, 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 abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sports Physical TherapySame topicTendon Structure and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207