MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W165201353 · doi:10.1177/229255030601400112

The Effectiveness of Sodium Tetradecyl Sulfate in the Treatment of Wrist Ganglia

2006· article· en· W165201353 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lawrence Ajekigbe, J. Russell Stothard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plastic Surgery · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJames Cook University
KeywordsMedicineWristSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ganglia are the most common benign soft tissue tumours of the hand. Although benign, a significant number of patients with wrist ganglia consult with their general practitioners, and ultimately the hand surgeon, complaining of pain. A great number of patients are concerned about the cosmetic appearance, and an equally significant number genuinely believe that the ganglion is a cancer. There are several management options resulting in varying degrees of success. These include observation only, surgical excision, aspiration only, aspiration with injection of methylprednisolone, and aspiration with injection of methylprednisolone and hyaluronidase. OBJECTIVE: The main objective was to investigate the effectiveness and safety of sodium tetradecyl sulfate as a sclerosing agent after aspiration of wrist ganglia. METHODS: Initial data were collected prospectively during a period of 48 months. Following this, patients were sent a postal survey at least two years after they had received treatment to access the levels of recurrence and persistent complications. RESULTS: In the short term, 90% of the patients achieved complete resolution after one episode of aspiration and injection. However, there was only a 65% cure rate after two to five years. Complications were few and not significant. CONCLUSION: Sodium tetradecyl sulfate is an effective sclerosing agent after aspiration of wrist ganglia with an excellent short-term efficacy and a long-term cure rate comparable to that of surgical excision.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plastic SurgerySame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207