Endoscopic Transnasal Approach to the Craniocervical Junction
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anterior access to the craniocervical junction has traditionally been through a transoral approach. With the advent of newer techniques, recent literature suggests a possible role for a transnasal endoscopic approach to the craniocervical junction. A review of the literature primarily consists of case reports and three anatomic cadaveric studies demonstrating the feasibility of an endonasal approach. In this retrospective review, we report our experience with four patients who underwent an endoscopic transnasal approach to the C1-C2 region. The surgical technique using a binasal endoscopic approach is described. The results indicate that the procedure is well tolerated with no significant deleterious sequelae. Although the use of this technique is in its early stages, the transnasal approach may offer a safe and effective alternative with minimal morbidity. Larger clinical studies are necessary to further explore the risks and benefits of this procedure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it