MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044504994 · doi:10.1177/0194599814541627a91

Hypothyroidism following Hemithyroidectomy

2014· article· en· W2044504994 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shlomo Merchavy, Tal Marom, Véronique‐Isabelle Forest, Benjamin M. Wolff, Alex Mlynarek, Michael P. Hier, Richard J. Payne

Bibliographic record

VenueOtolaryngology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid and Parathyroid Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThyroidRetrospective cohort studySurgeryThyroid-stimulating hormoneHormoneInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Assess the rate of hypothyroidism following hemithyroidectomy. Methods: A retrospective study in adult patients undergoing hemithyroidectomy at the McGill University Thyroid Cancer Centre, during the years 2007 through 2012. Patients with preoperative hypothyroidism were excluded. Patients were followed 12 to 60 months after the primary surgery, and preoperative thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) and free T4 levels were compared before and after the surgery. Hypothyroidism was defined as TSH levels >4.5 mU/L. Results: Of the 181 eligible patients in this study, 137 (75%) were females, with a mean age of 49.1 ± 14.3 years. The most common indication for surgery was follicular lesion. Hypothyroidism occurred in 65 (35%) of the patients, and was diagnosed at 1 to 36 months after surgery. Age and sex were not found to be risk factors for post‐hemithyroidectomy hypothyroidism. Conclusions: In this study 35% of patients undergoing hemithyroidectomy develop postoperative hypothyroidism. Upon preoperative patient counseling, hypothyroidism is a major morbidity that should be thoroughly 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOtolaryngologySame topicThyroid and Parathyroid SurgeryFrench-language works237,207