Localized Transcranial Electrical Motor Evoked Potentials for Monitoring Cranial Nerves in Cranial Base Surgery
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe a novel monitoring technique that allows "functional" assessment of cranial nerve continuity during cranial base surgery. METHODS: Facial motor evoked potentials (MEP) in 71 consecutive patients were obtained by localized transcranial electrical stimulation in all patients requiring facial nerve monitoring during the period from November 2002 to August 2004. With transcranial electrical stimulation localized to the contralateral cortex, facial nerve MEPs are obtained through stimulation of more proximal intracranial structures. RESULTS: Logistic regression revealed that the final-to-baseline facial MEP ratio predicted satisfactory (House-Brackmann Grade 1 and 2 function) immediate postoperative facial function (0.005 > P > 0.0005). Contingency table analysis showed high correlation (chi2, P < or = 2 x 10(8)) and acceptable test characteristics using a 50% final-to-baseline MEP ratio. CONCLUSION: Facial nerve MEPs recorded intraoperatively during cranial base surgery using the proposed technique predicts immediate postoperative facial nerve outcome. This technique can also be used to monitor other motor cranial nerves in cranial base surgery.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it