MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010151324 · doi:10.1097/prs.0b013e3182268e1b

Cleft Lip, Cleft Palate, and Velopharyngeal Insufficiency

2011· review· en· W2010151324 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

VenuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCleft Lip and Palate Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVelopharyngeal insufficiencyMedicineDeformityDentistryOrthodonticsCongenital diseaseSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Learning Objectives: After reading this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Recognize the clinical features associated with unilateral cleft lip, bilateral cleft lip, the cleft lip nasal deformity, cleft palate, and velopharyngeal insufficiency. 2. Describe the most frequently used techniques for repair of cleft lip and palate. 3. Diagnose and treat velopharyngeal insufficiency. Summary: This article provides an introduction to the anatomical and clinical features of the primary deformities associated with unilateral cleft lip–cleft palate, bilateral cleft lip–cleft palate, and cleft palate. The diagnosis and management of secondary velopharyngeal insufficiency are discussed. The accompanying videos demonstrate the features of the cleft lip nasal deformities and reliable surgical techniques for unilateral cleft lip repair, bilateral cleft lip repair, and radical intravelar veloplasty. RELATED VIDEO CONTENT IS AVAILABLE ONLINE.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.251 · 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