Physiological referrals for paediatric musculoskeletal complaints: A costly problem that needs to be addressed
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Referrals to paediatric orthopedists for physiologically normal conditions consume limited resources and delay care for patients. The goal of the present study was to formally define such referrals and determine their prevalence. METHODS: A retrospective review evaluated consecutive referrals to a single tertiary paediatric orthopedic centre over two eight-month periods. Referrals from family physicians and paediatricians were retained for analysis. Physiological referrals were defined as a final orthopedic diagnosis of 'within physiological norms'; and no scheduled follow up. RESULTS: Physiological conditions represented 22.5% of referrals. The type of referring physician did not determine referral quality. Flat foot, intoeing and genu varum/valgum exhibited physiological referral rates that exceeded 40%. CONCLUSION: Physiological referrals constitute a large portion of the outpatient paediatric orthopedic practice and represent a substantial unnecessary cost to the Canadian medical system. Future strategies to improve referral quality should target undergraduate and postgraduate musculoskeletal education.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it