Bibliographic record
Abstract
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. KEYWORDS Head and neck reconstruction - facial artery perforator flap - DIEAP flap - anterolateral thigh flap - submental flap - internal mammary artery perforator flap
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".