Quantitative Three‐Dimensional Ultrasound Imaging of Partially Resected Tongues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the impact of partial lateral glossectomies on tongue function and speech. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Tongue shapes of 12 patients with lateral tumors of the tongue were recorded with three-dimensional ultrasound before their surgery and two months after. Twelve normal participants served as controls. Speech acceptability was also assessed. RESULTS: Principal component analyses demonstrated that the flap reconstructions led to a stiffening of the operated side of the tongue. A concavity index and an asymmetry index demonstrated that the glossectomy patients exhibited decreased midsagittal grooving and increased lingual asymmetry. The change in midsagittal grooving correlated moderately with the decrease in speech acceptability. CONCLUSION: A lateral partial glossectomy affects the tongue's intrinsic deformation, in particular midsagittal grooving and symmetry. This can have a detrimental effect for speech. SIGNIFICANCE: A lateral resection affects the tongue's symmetry and midsagittal groove. The change in midsagittal grooving correlates with a decrease in speech acceptability.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".