Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este articulo expone el fundamento teorico oncologico y medico de la nefrectomia parcial como tratamiento de eleccion de los tumores renales T1, siempre que sea posible. El valor de la nefrectomia parcial en el tratamiento de los tumores corticales renales esta ganando cada vez mayor reconocimiento gracias a (1) un mejor conocimiento de la biologia de los tumores corticales renales; (2) un mejor conocimiento sobre el tamano de los tumores y el desplazamiento del estadio hacia tumores mas pequenos en el momento de la presentacion; (3) estudios que demuestran la eficacia oncologica de la cirugia de preservacion renal, tanto por tecnicas abiertas como laparoscopicas, y (4) la mayor concienciacion sobre la gran prevalencia de la NPC y su morbilidad y mortalidad cardiovasculares asociadas. El abuso de la nefrectomia radical para tratar tumores renales pequenos se debe considerar en la actualidad perjudicial para el bienestar a largo plazo del paciente con un tumor cortical renal pequeno.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.965 | 0.968 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".