Donor-Site Morbidity of the Inferior Gluteal Musculocutaneous Flap for Breast Reconstruction in Teenagers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to objectively evaluate donor-site morbidity of the inferior gluteal musculocutaneous flap in teenagers. All cases of breast reconstruction performed between 1996 and 2005 using an inferior gluteal flap were reviewed. Flap size, weight, and pedicle origin were noted. Donor-site morbidity was assessed for scarring, contour deformity, muscle function, and sensation. The charts of 15 patients were reviewed, and 6 patients were available for further investigation. The average flap size and weight were 17 cm x 7 cm and 430 g, respectively. All patients had a well-concealed scar with minimal buttock asymmetry. Sensory assessment showed some degree of hypoesthesia in the territory of the posterior femoral cutaneous nerve in all patients. There was no functional loss. Donor-site morbidity of the inferior gluteal musculocutaneous flap is largely related to posterior thigh hypoesthesia despite preservation of the posterior femoral cutaneous nerve.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".