An Update: The Operative Experience in Adrenal, Pancreatic, and Other Less Common Endocrine Diseases of U.S. General Surgery Residents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A prior study that examined the operative experience of general surgery residents in endocrine surgery for the academic years 1986-1987 to 1993-1994 found this training to be inadequate due to low operative volume. METHODS: To evaluate how the development of minimally invasive endocrine surgery might alter this outcome, we reviewed more recent data from the Resident Statistic Summaries (Report C) of the Residency Review Committee from 1994-1995 to 2003-2004. RESULTS: The main outcome measures were total number of residents and programs and the volume and distribution of operations performed. For adrenalectomy, the average number of cases per resident was 1.46; for endocrine pancreas, the average was 0.14. The most common number of any of these procedures performed by U.S. graduates was zero. CONCLUSION: Reports from postgraduate training in laparoscopic or endocrine surgery suggest that these fellowships may provide the necessary additional operative experience.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".