MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022603127 · doi:10.1055/s-2006-941711

Perforator Flaps in Head and Neck Reconstruction

2006· article· en· W2022603127 on OpenAlex
Peter C. Neligan, Joan E. Lipa

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

VenueSeminars in Plastic Surgery · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHead and neckPerforator flapsSurgeryFacial arteryFacial reconstructionAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article attempts to put perforator flaps, as they apply to head and neck reconstruction, into perspective. The importance of existing flaps is emphasized. Specific indications for perforator flaps are highlighted. The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap is used as the flap of choice for subtotal glossectomy defects by the authors. The anterolateral thigh flap is the most common flap currently used. Indications for its use are highlighted. Facial artery perforator flaps are introduced, and their roles as local flaps in head and neck reconstruction are highlighted. With our better understanding of vascular anatomy, existing flaps such as the submental flap have been recategorized as perforator flaps. Its role in reconstruction, particularly of lower facial defects, is discussed. Finally the internal mammary artery perforator flap is described and its advantages over the deltopectoral flap and the pectoralis major flap outlined.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.686

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
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