How we do it: the anterior thoraco‐cervical approach to tumours of the thoracic inlet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
KEYPOINTS: Tumours that arise in the thoracic inlet and superior mediastinum may be benign or malignant and present the surgeon with a difficult problem of access. The standard approach to the thoracic inlet from below offers limited exposure to the vascular and neural structures superior to the tumours. The anterior thoraco-cervical approach to the root of the neck and superior mediastinum combines the anterior cervical approach with a limited upper median sternotomy. If further access is required to achieve surgical clearance a full sternotomy split can be performed. The approach offers excellent exposure and helps to facilitate complete resection of benign and malignant tumours, which would otherwise be deemed inoperable or difficult to resect completely through other standard approaches. In contrast to previously described anterior transcervical thoracic approaches which required resection of part of the clavicle or manubrium as well as thoracotomy with increased morbidity, the anterior thoraco-cervical approach is associated with little morbidity and the postoperative stay is short.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
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".