MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Angular Dermoid Cysts in the Endoscopic Era: Retrospective Analysis of Aesthetic Results Using the Direct, Classic Method

2004· article· en· W1987175504 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTeratomas and Epidermoid Cysts
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScarsDermoid cystSurgeryCystRetrospective cohort studyGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of the endoscopic approach was recently introduced for the removal of angular dermoid cysts. Therefore, it was considered necessary to evaluate the conventional direct incisional approach for angular dermoid cyst excision, with respect to long-term aesthetic results and complications. The need to change from the direct excisional technique to the endoscopic approach in hair-bearing areas was investigated. During a 25-year period, 95 children were surgically treated by a single surgeon (H.G.T.) for removal of angular dermoid cysts. Only 22 patients (23 percent) were available for reassessment. The follow-up periods after the excisional procedure were 1 to 12 years. Assessments were performed by a 15-member team of assessors, who scored the aesthetic results of the scars with comparative slides. In addition, a questionnaire was mailed to each family, to document the family members' perceptions of the aesthetic appearance of the scar. Twenty-eight families (29 percent) responded. The complications were determined through the medical records department. For 19 of 22 patients (86 percent), the scar was scored by 85 percent of the assessors as excellent or good. No assessor stated that a scar was unacceptable. In the family questionnaires, 26 of 28 families (93 percent) reported an excellent scar and two (7 percent) reported a fair scar. No family stated that the scar was unacceptable. The operative notes for the 95 patients revealed that only two cysts had ruptured during the surgical procedure (2 percent) and only one infection had occurred (1 percent). No other major complications were reported. It is concluded that the direct method for dermoid cyst excision is an excellent approach, with a low complication rate and a very high aesthetic success rate, when performed through a supra-eyebrow or infra-eyebrow incision.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.769

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.265 · 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