Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epistaxis is a common otolaryngology emergency and is often controlled with first-line interventions such as cautery, hemostatic agents, or anterior nasal packing. A subset of patients will continue to bleed and require more aggressive therapy. METHODS: Intractable spontaneous epistaxis was traditionally managed with posterior nasal packing and prolonged hospital admission. In an effort to reduce patient morbidity and shorten hospital stay, surgical and endovascular techniques have gained popularity. A literature review was conducted. RESULTS: Transnasal endoscopic sphenopalatine artery ligation and arterial embolization provide excellent control rates but the decision to choose one over the other can be challenging. The role of transnasal endoscopic anterior ethmoid artery ligation is unclear but may be considered in certain cases when bleeding localizes to the ethmoid region. CONCLUSION: This article will focus on the management of intractable spontaneous epistaxis and discuss the role of endoscopic arterial ligation and embolization as it pertains to this challenging clinical scenario.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".