MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986636572 · doi:10.2310/7070.2001.19409

Formaldehyde Fasciaform Tympanoplasty: A Reliable Technique for Closing Large Tympanic Membrane Perforations

2001· article· en· W1986636572 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Maureen Harriman, Brian D. Westerberg, Frederick K. Kozak

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Otolaryngology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEar Surgery and Otitis Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTympanoplastyMedicineTympanic Membrane PerforationSurgeryPerforationClosing (real estate)Composite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Formaldehyde fasciaform grafting tympanoplasty is a reliable method, in experienced hands, to close large tympanic membrane perforations. The technique involves using autogenous temporalis fascia shaped by formaldehyde cross-linking on a special fasciaform mold (Hear America, Palo Alto, CA). This study was undertaken with the objective of assessing if an otologist with less experience in using this technique could obtain comparable results. The results of the initial 23 patients treated in this manner by one surgeon between August 1996 and January 1998 are reviewed. Success was measured by the rate of closure of the tympanic membrane perforation and by functional closure of the air-bone gap. Favourable results were obtained, with complete closure of 86% of the perforations and closure of the air-bone gap to 20 dB or less in 90% of subjects when the ossicular chain was intact. The formaldehyde fasciaform tympanoplasty technique produces consistent, reliable, and reproducible results for large tympanic membrane perforations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of OtolaryngologySame topicEar Surgery and Otitis MediaFrench-language works237,207