Current Curative Surgical Management of Gallbladder Cancer: A Brief Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
G allbladder cancer has a dismal prognosis, radical surgical resection offers the only chance of cure, but it is possible in only small proportion due to advanced disease and the recurrence is high. The extent of resection depends on the extent of disease. The aim of any therapeutic operation must be the radical removal of the tumor with no residual disease (R0 resection). Crucial for the surgical strategy is the TNM staging and the planning is decided in accordance with the T stage. In T1a simple cholecystectomy is considered as an adequate treatment. In T1b there is a controversy; some advocate simple cholecystectomy and others more extensive radical cholecystectomy. In T2 either extended radical cholecystectomy or resection of liver segments IV b and V . In all cases a radical lymph node dissection along the hepatoduodenal ligament is needed additionally. In T3 either hepatic segmentectomy IV b and V at least or extended right hepatectomy, both combined always with radical lymph node dissection. In T4 usually palliative operation; an extensive en-block resection with removal of included organs is rarely attempted. doi:10.4021/ jcs50w
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".