MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022510459 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100007666

Anterior Corpectomy Approach for Removal of a Cervical Intradural Schwannoma

2008· letter· en· W2022510459 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Steven Casha, Jing Xie, R. John Hurlbert

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2008
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma Cases
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCorpectomySpinal cordSchwannomaSpinal canalAnatomySurgeryDecompression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spinal schwannomas are typically intradural-extramedullary neoplasms thought to arise from Schwann cells or their progenitors which occur proportionally throughout the spinal canal. They most typically arise from dorsal sensory rootlets and occupy a posterior-lateral location in the spinal canal. Thus, posterior surgical procedures have become the conventional method to remove these tumors providing adequate exposure in most cases. More anteriorly located tumors may be approached through a posterolateral direction with section of the dentate ligament and gentle rotation of the spinal cord. However, posterior and posterolateral approaches may be problematic for removing tumors located in the midline and ventral to the spinal cord. Although the anterior approach has been applied widely to treat cervical spondylosis, it has rarely been used to remove intradural tumors. Here, we present a case of a ventral cervical spinal schwannoma removed through an anterior approach followed by spinal reconstruction.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma CasesFrench-language works237,207