MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057819878 · doi:10.1007/s002680010159

Hashimoto's Disease and Thyroid Lymphoma: Role of the Surgeon

2000· review· en· W2057819878 on OpenAlexaff
Janice L. Pasieka

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Surgery · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDebulkingThyroid lymphomaThyroidThyroiditisDiseaseLymphomaThyroid diseasePathologyGeneral surgerySurgeryInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the turn of the century, the role of the surgeon in the treatment of diseases such as Hashimoto's and thyroid lymphoma has diminished. That is not to say that the surgeon must not have a thorough understanding of these diseases and the role he or she plays in their diagnosis and treatment. Hashimoto's disease is a common disease. Not infrequently the endocrine surgeon is faced with a thyroid nodule in a background of Hashimoto's disease. Interpretation of fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of a nodule in a patient with the background of Hashimoto's disease may be misleading if the surgeon fails to understand the limitations of FNA. The role of the surgeon in the treatment and diagnosis of thyroid lymphomas has evolved from surgical debulking to open biopsy. With the use of irradiation and chemotherapy, the need for surgical debulking has nearly disappeared. The recent development of ancillary techniques such as light chain restriction, flow cytometry, gene rearrangement, and immunohistochemical staining have enabled cytopathologists to diagnose thyroid lymphoma by FNA, further diminishing the surgeon's role in the diagnosis and treatment of this disease.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations72
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of SurgerySame topicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207