MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4376105641 · doi:10.1097/prs.0000000000010279

Sir Harold Gillies: The Modern Father of Plastic Surgery

2023· article· en· W4376105641 sur OpenAlexaff
Max Solish, Janine M. Roller, Toni Zhong

Notice bibliographique

RevuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHistory of Medical Practice
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity Health Network
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicinePlastic surgerySpecialtyArt historyClassicsSurgeryHistoryPsychiatry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

For Gillies, plastic surgery not only involved restoring function but also making the person look normal and sometimes more beautiful than before. He was driven by the idea that the surgeon should be creative, imaginative—in fact, an artist.1 —C.J. Williams Dr. Harold Gillies is widely regarded as the modern father of plastic surgery and his contributions to the specialty were foundational. Gillies was a pioneer of innumerable procedures that continue to be used today, including the tubed pedicle flap and female-to-male gender affirmation surgery.2 Harold Gillies was born on June 17, 1882, in Dunedin, New Zealand.2 He studied medicine at Gonville and Caius College in Cambridge and completed his clinical training in London.2 Although Gillies specialized in ear, nose, and throat surgery, his career path quickly deviated during World War I.2,3 Through his experience with the Red Cross and dentist Auguste Valadier in France, as well as his surgical observership of Hippolyte Morestin, he developed a keen interest in facial reconstructive surgery.2 Gillies brought his experience back to England, opening a facial reconstruction unit in Aldershot in 1915, then his second in 1917 in Sidcup once the first unit became overloaded with war casualties.2 Sidcup became an important teaching base, concentrating highly technical cases with the world’s finest surgeons.2 Based on his key contributions, Dr. Gillies was knighted in 1930.2 Dr. Gillies pushed the limits of plastic surgery through his innovation and development of novel surgical techniques. He pioneered procedures, such as the nasal inlay graft,3 amputated digit autograft,4 fan flap,3 forehead flap variations,3 phalloplasty,2 and temporalis transfer,2 and was an important contributor to the tubed pedicle flap,2 face lift,1 and mammaplasty.1 Throughout his career, Gillies was an avid educator and played a major role in developing multidisciplinary medical teams, involving artists, sculptors, and photographers to assist in case planning and documentation.2 He also worked closely with other physicians, including anesthesiologists Rubens Wade and Ivan Magill, who pioneered crucial advances in surgical anesthesia.2 Beyond his technical skillset, Dr. Gillies was a strong advocate for his patients, even when his surgeries were not yet socially accepted. Most notably, he performed the world’s first phalloplasty against UK legislature, a practice that ultimately advanced the field toward greater inclusivity.1,2,4 To address the extensive facial injuries sustained by soldiers in World War I, Dr. Gilles was a key contributor to developing the technique using pedicled and tubed flaps to restore facial form and function. This facilitated the integration of injured soldiers back into their communities but also set the foundation for more complex reconstructive techniques that became the standard surgical techniques used in gender-affirming procedures, head and neck reconstruction, and breast surgery. Dr. Gillies was a pivotal advocate for multidisciplinary, patient-centered teams, which would only decades later be recognized as the standard of care. He died in 1960,5 but his legacy within the field of plastic surgery will continue to inspire new generations of surgeons. DISCLOSURE The authors declare that their study was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,015
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,050

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,002
Communication savante0,0020,002
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,007
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0150,005

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,045
Tête enseignante GPT0,265
Écart entre enseignants0,220 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations10
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePlastic & Reconstructive SurgeryMême sujetHistory of Medical PracticeTravaux en français237 207