MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantitative Comparison of Open Reduction and Internal Fixation versus the Gillies Method in the Treatment of Orbitozygomatic Complex Fractures

2005· article· en· W2026967829 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 · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Trauma and Fracture Management
Canadian institutionsMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal fixationReduction (mathematics)SurgeryFixation (population genetics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Precise repair of orbitozygomatic complex fractures is essential for proper re-establishment of facial symmetry, ocular globe position, and infraorbital nerve function. Controversy regarding the optimal treatment method remains. METHODS: To compare uniform study groups, only patients without previous craniofacial injuries or operations who had sustained moderate-energy orbitozygomatic complex fractures, based on preoperative computed tomography scans, and who were treated using the Gillies repair or open reduction and internal fixation were selected. Quantifiable end-points, including orbitozygomatic complex position, ocular globe projection, and infraorbital nerve function, were measured to objectively compare the accuracy of repair produced by the Gillies procedure and open reduction and internal fixation. Negative sequelae resulting from cutaneous access were tabulated. RESULTS: Overall, 12 patients treated using the Gillies repair and 12 treated with open reduction and internal fixation were examined. The results demonstrated that the open reduction and internal fixation technique produces superior realignment of the orbitozygomatic complex, that is, a smaller difference in the position of the orbitozygomatic complex between the injured and noninjured sides of the face. The differences in orbitozygomatic complex projection, height, and lateral position were 1.4 mm, 1.4 mm, and 1.6 mm, respectively, in the open reduction and internal fixation group and 7.5 mm, 5.6 mm, and 4.1 mm in the Gillies group. The p values were 0.0003, 0.01, and 0.06, respectively. Visible cutaneous scarring was present in four patients and lower lid shortening was seen in three patients treated using open reduction and internal fixation. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to objectively show that the open reduction and internal fixation technique results in superior positioning of the orbitozygomatic complex in moderate-energy orbitozygomatic complex fractures compared with the Gillies repair. Although negative sequelae from surgical access were substantial, recently introduced transconjunctival and upper lid blepharoplasty incisions will minimize these drawbacks.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.283 · 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