MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prognostic Factors for Reoperation After Plate Fixation of the Midshaft Clavicle

2015· article· en· W801090903 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder and Clavicle Injuries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClavicleNonunionSurgeryFixation (population genetics)Retrospective cohort studyImplantInternal fixationImplant failurePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine which prognostic factors were associated with an increased risk for all-cause reoperation in a heterogeneous population of patients treated with primary plate fixation of a midshaft clavicular fracture. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Single university-affiliated tertiary care Level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS: Of 235 consecutive patients with primary plate fixation for a midshaft clavicular fracture. A reviewer extracted data through a retrospective chart review regarding 20 possible prognostic variables and documented reoperations (defined as any surgical procedure after the initial surgery, including implant removal, bone grafts, implant exchanges, or debridement for infection). INTERVENTION: Open reduction and internal fixation of the clavicle using straight and precontoured clavicle plates. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Complete 2-year follow-up information was available for 153 of 235 patients (65%). Of these 153 patients included in the analysis, 58 (38%) had reoperations. The preoperative risk factors for 3 specific "reoperation outcomes" were examined: (1) reoperation for implant removal alone; (2) reoperation for nonunion, infection, or fixation failure; and (3) multiple reoperations. RESULTS: There was a significant reoperation rate in this patient series (58 of 153 patients, 38%). Although most were for isolated plate removal (42 of 153 patients, 27%), there were a minority of patients who required more complex (16 of 153 patients, 10%) or multiple (8 of 153 patients, 5%) procedures. For these 3 possible outcomes (reoperation for implant removal alone, reoperation for nonunion, infection, or fixation failure, and the need for multiple reoperations), significant risk factors were identified that can assist surgeons in patient selection and predicting reoperation after plate fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures. The significant risk factors for implant removal alone (42 of 153, 27%) were the use of a plate that was not precontoured and patient height <175 cm. The significant risk factors for reoperation for nonunion, infection, or fixation failure (16 of 153, 10%) were illicit drug use, diabetes, and previous surgery of the shoulder. The significant risk factors for multiple reoperations (8 of 153, 5%) were age >55 years and alcohol use >15 drinks per week. CONCLUSIONS: The use of precontoured plates can decrease the rate of hardware removal after primary fixation of displaced fractures of the midshaft clavicle. Also, specific preoperative prognostic factors may be used to counsel patients, maximize outcomes, minimize serious complications, and limit revision surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.312 · 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