Anesthesia and outcome after partial hepatectomy for adult-to-adult donor transplantation
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
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The worldwide adoption of live liver donors as a source of donor organs for transplantation has been curtailed by the very real risk of complications in otherwise healthy people. Our objective in this review is to outline the perioperative management of the live liver donor for adult-to-adult transplantation. RECENT FINDINGS: The incidence and severity of complications following live liver donation is extremely variable, and reporting needs to be standardized if we are to improve the perioperative management and outcomes. Agreed definitions would clarify the incidence and severity of postoperative complications, allow identification of areas in which management can be improved and suggest areas for future investigation. Such an effort will require the cooperation of centers around the world. SUMMARY: Live liver donation is a valuable option for organ donation that can be conducted safely with a multidisciplinary perioperative approach. Future considerations should focus on the recovery period and how the intraoperative management can be optimized to minimize the impact of surgery on donors' quality of life.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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