MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1439774660 · doi:10.1177/229255030801600411

The ‘Dirty Lip’ Trick

2008· article· en· W1439774660 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Nicholas W. Jones, Cynthia Verchere

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plastic Surgery · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCleft Lip and Palate Research
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVermilionMedicinePlastic surgeryBlood supplyAnatomySurgeryDentistryArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lips are complex anatomical structures with significant psychosocial and functional importance. The wet-dry line or ‘red line’ on the lip represents the transition from oral mucosa to lip vermilion, and is one of the essential anatomical landmarks required for accurate reconstruction of the lip. Identification of the wet-dry line is important in cleft lip surgery, particularly if a triangular vermilion flap from the lateral element is used to augment the deficient vermilion on the medial side, as described by Noordhoff (1). During lip surgery, landmarks and presurgical marking are often distorted by intraoperative edema and local anesthetic infiltration; standard methods for maintaining these landmarks in the cutaneous lip, such as tattooing, are not as effective in the vermilion. The authors present a simple yet effective way of identifying the red line during surgery. The immediate response when attempting to identify the wet-dry junction is to clean the lip of any dried blood for better visualization. The authors simply suggest leaving the lip ‘dirty’; the blood adheres to the wet mucosa and not to the dry, thus clearly and consistently identifying the junction between wet and dry mucosa (Figures 1A and ​and1B1B). Figure 1) A and B Leaving the lip ‘dirty’ during cleft lip surgery clearly identifies the division between wet and dry vermilion The authors have been surprised at how often such a simple technique has been useful in cleft and other forms of reconstructive lip surgery.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plastic SurgerySame topicCleft Lip and Palate ResearchFrench-language works237,207