Laparoscopic adrenalectomy for the management of benign and malignant adrenal tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laparoscopic adrenalectomy has become the preferred approach for removal of the adrenal gland. Many published studies support the use of laparoscopic adrenalectomy, with comparisons to open adrenalectomy suggesting many advantages to laparoscopy, including less postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay and earlier return to work. Adrenalectomy is usually required for the removal of adrenal tumors causing excess hormone production or because a malignant adrenal tumor cannot be excluded. Current controversies include the appropriateness of laparoscopic adrenalectomy for large or malignant tumors, the role of partial adrenalectomy and the management of some conditions with uncertain natural history (such as subclinical hypercortisolism). With the increased use of sensitive cross-sectional imaging, the detection of clinically inapparent adrenal masses is likely to continue to increase. Due to the fact that malignancy cannot be excluded with certainty in some patients with cortical adenomas, it is expected that the rate of laparoscopic adrenalectomy will continue to increase.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 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) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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.
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".