Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The review will discuss postthoracotomy/scopy ipsilateral shoulder pain, a common, intense and distressing outcome of chest surgery. This review will highlight some of the diagnostic vagaries in the current literature and present an argument for the etiology of this pain. In addition, perioperative management will be discussed. Evidence will be presented that effective prevention and treatment is possible for this pain entity. A multimodal management strategy for prevention and treatment of postthoracotomy/scopy ipsilateral shoulder pain is proposed. Finally, this review will highlight potential areas for investigation. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies of postthoracotomy/scopy ipsilateral shoulder pain are few and the etiology of the pain is not clearly understood. Recent randomized studies of treatments for this pain entity have implicated the phrenic nerve in the genesis of this pain syndrome. Prospective studies of the natural history of this pain syndrome have also highlighted other sources of the pain. SUMMARY: A picture is emerging of a pain syndrome that may be intense but is relatively limited in duration. The effect of this pain on overall perioperative morbidity is not known. Potential areas for investigation including studies to determine risk factors for postthoracotomy/scopy ISP are discussed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".