Trismus following treatment of head and neck cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this preliminary study was to determine the prevalence of trismus in head and neck cancer patients treated with radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy and surgery. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with malignant lesions in the head and neck treated with curative intent were comprehensively evaluated for trismus using subjective and objective measures. RESULTS: A large proportion of the 70 patients recruited demonstrated moderate to severe subjective trismus (45.7%). Similarly, the vast majority of patients showed slight to severe trismus (91.4%) according to objective secondary outcome measures. Of these patients, 21 (65.6%) were also treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy. When the radiation field involved the pterygoid muscles, 30 (93.8%) patients reported subjective trismus. Similarly, bilateral pterygoid muscle inclusion resulted in 28 (87.5%) patients with trismus. CONCLUSIONS: Trismus is a significantly prevalent consequence of treatment for head and neck cancer. Predictive factors include treatment with concurrent chemoradiotherapy and bilateral inclusion of the structures of mastication in the high-dose radiotherapy volume.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".