Tisseel and Its Effects on Wound Drainage Post-Thyroidectomy: Prospective, Randomized, Blinded, Controlled Study
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: This randomized, blinded, controlled study examines the effects of fibrin sealant (Tisseel, Laboratoire de production Baxter AG, Vienna, Austria) on wound drainage following thyroidectomy. METHODS: Fifty-six consecutive patients were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomized into Tisseel and non-Tisseel treatment groups. Wound drain output was tallied in 8-hour increments by observers blinded to the treatment groups. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients completed the study. Significant decreases in wound drainage were found in the first 8 hours in the Tisseel group. Eight hours postoperatively, wound output in the Tisseel group was reduced by 44% compared with the non-Tisseel group. A significant decrease in the total drainage over the 64-hour time period of 43% was noted between the treatment and control groups. Post-thyroidectomy wound drainage was reduced and trended to earlier drain removal. No significant changes in the length of hospital stay were noted, nor were postoperative complications encountered in either treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Fibrin sealants offer a unique opportunity to safely decrease post-thyroidectomy wound drainage. This investigation furthers the evidence that fibrin sealants could safely enable the implementation of drain-free thyroidectomies.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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