MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predictors of functional outcomes following limb salvage surgery for lower-extremity soft tissue sarcoma

2000· article· en· W1999990086 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Oncology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSarcomaSoft tissueSurgeryMotor functionPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient function has been conceptualized by clinical measures such as joint motion, muscle strength, disability, and general health status. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate tumor and treatment variables predictive of these conceptually different posttreatment functional outcomes in patients treated with limb preservation surgery for lower-extremity soft tissue sarcoma. METHODS: One hundred seventy-two patients with minimum 1-year follow-up were evaluated using the following outcomes: impairment, measured by the 1987 and 1993 versions of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Rating Scale (MSTS); disability, measured by the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS); and general health status, using the Short Form-36 (SF-36). Tumor and treatment-related variables (age, gender, presenting disease status, anatomic site, tumor size, grade, depth, prior excision, irradiation, bone resection, motor nerve sacrifice, and complications) were extracted from the STS database. RESULTS: Large tumor size, bone resection, motor nerve resection, and complications were predictive of lower MSTS 1987 and 1993 scores. Patients with large, high-grade tumors who required motor nerve resection were more disabled, as reflected by lower TESS scores. Only age and prior surgery were adverse predictors of SF-36 score. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that different factors are predictive of different patient outcomes, specifically, impairment, disability, and general health status. It is important to define function when counseling patients regarding their potential recovery based on tumor and treatment-related variables. J. Surg. Oncol. 2000;73:206-211.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.285 · 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