MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006655384 · doi:10.1097/mou.0b013e328302edd5

Current status of bladder neck reconstruction

2008· review· en· W2006655384 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

VenueCurrent Opinion in Urology · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSling (weapon)Neck of urinary bladderUrinary incontinenceConcomitantSurgeryUrinary bladderUrologyGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This paper reviews the literature over the last 3 years on bladder outlet procedures for children with urinary incontinence. The multitude of procedures and need for concomitant bladder augmentation indicates that there is no ideal surgical option for these children. RECENT FINDINGS: The results of bladder neck slings with or without bladder augmentation have been reported in some key studies during this review period. Several modifications of the bladder wrap around sling and modifications of the Kropp-Salle procedure are described. Long-term results of bladder neck injections are highlighted. Preliminary results of complete primary repair of bladder exstrophy are compared with those of staged repair. SUMMARY: Achieving urinary continence is difficult and continues to challenge the reconstructive surgeon. Standardized definition of dryness and further efforts to search for preoperative criteria to define the etiology of incontinence are needed to better assess outcomes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.274 · 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