MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The First Successful Lower Extremity Transplantation: 6-Year Follow-Up and Implications for Cortical Plasticity

2011· article· en· W1550458629 on OpenAlexaff
Adel Fattah, Tatiana Karine Simon Cypel, Elizabeth Donner, F. Wang, Benjamin A. Alman, Ronald M. Zuker

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Transplantation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan and Tissue Transplantation Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsMedicineTransplantationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vascularized composite allotransplantation as a viable reconstructive option is gaining recognition and new cases are being reported with increasing frequency including hand, face and laryngeal transplantation. However, only one successful complete lower limb transplantation has been reported to date, in which a functioning limb from one ischiopagus twin with a lethal cardiac anomaly was transplanted to the other. Six years later, the patient is mobilizing well and engaging in sporting activities with her peers in a mainstream school. Clinical evaluation of motor and sensory modalities demonstrated a good functional result. Quality of life was assessed using the short form-36 health survey and lower extremity functional scale disclosing a high level of social and physical capacity. Functional magnetic resonance imaging was performed and showed cortical integration of the limb; the implications of cortical plasticity and vascularized composite allotransplantation for the correction of congenital limb anomalies are presented.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations49
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of TransplantationSame topicOrgan and Tissue Transplantation ResearchFrench-language works237,207