MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970497991 · doi:10.1080/01676830500544185

Clinical Controversy: Congenital Unilateral and Jaw-Winking Ptosis

2006· article· en· W1970497991 on OpenAlexaff
Brett O’Donnell, François Codère, Richard K. Dortzbach, Mark J. Lucarelli, Robert C. Kersten, Paul Rosser

Bibliographic record

VenueOrbit · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsRoyal Victoria Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPtosisMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Paediatric ptosis is routinely more challenging than adult ptosis with considerations such as amblyopia, difficulty of examination and at what age surgery should be performed. Unilateral severe congenital ptosis and jaw-winking ptosis raise additional questions of which surgical procedure and whether unilateral or bilateral surgery should be performed. A panel of international experts answer questions relating to two clinical scenarios.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0160.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrbitSame topicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207