MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W127740749

A bone to pick? Fish bones of the upper aerodigestive tract: review of the literature.

2012· article· en· W127740749 on OpenAlexaff
Noah Sands, Keith Richardson, Alex Mlynarek

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicForeign Body Medical Cases
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFish boneOtorhinolaryngologyMedicineFish <Actinopterygii>AccidentalSurgeryFisheryBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Fish bones are of particular interest to the otolaryngologist as accidental ingestion is one of the most common reasons for otolaryngology-related emergency department referrals. Furthermore, removal of fish bones deeply lodged in the oropharynx or hypopharynx can be both hazardous and technically difficult, and failure to accomplish safe removal could result in considerable morbidity and various critical complications. OBJECTIVE: We present here a literature review on the topic of fish bones in otolaryngology with a focus on selection of patients for intervention and on removal techniques. We emphasize that retained fish bones should be approached with caution as their course can at times be unpredictable, as we describe here.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score0.734

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicForeign Body Medical CasesFrench-language works237,207