MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029861675 · doi:10.1097/sle.0b013e3181b05dcc

Outpatient Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy

2009· article· en· W2029861675 on OpenAlexaffabout
Waleed Mohammad, Ian Frost, Vijay Moonje

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdrenal and Paraganglionic Tumors
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdrenalectomySurgeryOutpatient surgeryAtelectasisMedical prescriptionOutpatient procedureGeneral surgeryAnesthesiaAmbulatoryInternal medicineLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We report our experience at The Ottawa Hospital with outpatient laparoscopic adrenalectomy. METHODS: We report a single surgeon experience. Seventeen consecutive outpatient laparoscopic adrenalectomy were performed between 1994 and 2006. Specific selection criteria were applied. Postoperatively patients were monitored and assessed before discharge. Full discharge instructions were provided. A prescription for analgesic was given. A call back system was put in place. The first postoperative office visit was scheduled within 7 days of surgery. RESULTS: Twelve of 17 patients were females. The mean age was 52.4 years. Our average operating room time was 130 minutes with no conversions. The average stay was about 5.5 hours. Three patients had a 23-hour stay. One admitted with atelectasis. Tumor size ranged from 1 to 5.8 cm. There were no reoperations, late admissions up to 30 days, and no deaths. One patient required admission. Thirteen of 17 patients were contacted by phone after discharge. At our hospital we found a cost saving of C$1478 is made per case. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic adrenalectomy can be safely performed as an outpatient procedure. Strict selection criteria should be applied. Call back systems should be instituted. There is a cost benefit associated with this outpatient procedure.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous TechniquesSame topicAdrenal and Paraganglionic TumorsFrench-language works237,207