MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039871568 · doi:10.1002/hed.23935

Extent of neck dissection after transoral robotic surgical resection of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: Report of a case and potential indications for inclusion of level I in a selective neck dissection

2014· article· en· W2039871568 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher W. Noel, Andrew Foreman, David P. Goldstein, John R. de Almeida

Bibliographic record

VenueHead & Neck · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeck dissectionTransoral robotic surgeryMedicineBasal cellSurgical resectionDissection (medical)SurgeryCarcinomaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: With new minimally invasive surgical techniques playing a role in the management of early oropharyngeal carcinomas, appropriate surgical management of the neck is an increasingly important consideration. METHODS: We present a case of a 47-year-old patient with a clinical T2N1M0 squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the right tonsil with anterior extension toward the floor of the mouth from the right glossotonsillar sulcus. Imaging revealed a solitary necrotic lymph node in level IIA. The decision was made to proceed with a transoral robotic pharyngectomy and selective neck dissection of levels II to IV, followed by adjuvant radiotherapy. RESULTS: A postoperative scan revealed progressive regional disease in the anterior aspect of level IB, and, as such, a completion neck dissection of level I was performed. CONCLUSION: Special consideration must be given to level I, particularly in patients with glossotonsillar sulcus involvement and anterior extension toward the floor of the mouth.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score0.657

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.282 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHead & NeckSame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207