{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02629757785467128, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011072664359861591, 'mean_word_length': 4.926229508196721, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
ROLE OF DIFFERENT CRITERIA IN OUTCOME ANALYSIS OF MANAGEMENT OF GAP NON-UNION

Back ground and objectives
Gap or Defect non-union is not uncommon in Orthopaedic practice. Management involves prolonged periods of tedious procedures and decision making. The endpoint of such management does not reveal itself as a well-defined point. Follow ups must include some analysable outcome which should have a standardised criteria-based endpoint.
A well-aligned, painless, noninfected, and functional limb is the goal of treatment.
The objective of this study is to understand the role of different criterion to understand whether the goal has been reached.
Summary
The study is designed as retrospective, prospective observational study. It is conducted in tertiary care hospital (MIOT Hospitals, Chennai). 
Initial evaluation of all cases were done by Maurizio Catagni’s Classification. Type of surgeries, time spent in hospital, union time were calculated. Patients were followed up for a period of 1year.
Patients with average defect size of 6.29cm on an average underwent 4.47 procedures and for an overall time of 17.8 weeks with around 83.80 % of individuals were able to return to their preinjury activity level. 
Analysis of the outcome was done by ASAMI bone criteria, ASAMI functional criteria, Cattneo et al criteria and Karstrom-Olerud’s functional evaluation criteria for lower limbs at onset of treatment, 6 months and 1 year of treatment,