MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060322424 · doi:10.1177/1089253207311160

Surgical, Anesthetic, Perfusion-Related Advances in Minimal Access Surgery

2007· review· en· W2060322424 on OpenAlex
Bob Kiaii, Daniel Bainbridge, Philip Fernandes

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary bypassCardiac surgeryMedian sternotomyAnestheticMinimally invasive cardiac surgerySurgical proceduresSurgeryAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As we enter the fifth decade in cardiac surgery, traditionally cardiac surgery has been performed using a median sternotomy with cardiopulmonary bypass providing great access to the heart and all the surrounding structures. During the last decade, there has been a paradigm shift in the methods by which surgery has been performed. The invasiveness of many procedures has been dramatically reduced, with significantly superior outcomes, as evidenced by improved survival, fewer complications, and quicker return to functional health and productive life. This resulted in significant interest and excitement in adopting less invasive techniques in cardiac surgery. Unfortunately, this was an unrealistic expectation due to the limitations that existed in cardiac surgical techniques and conventional endoscopic instruments, cardiac anesthesia, and cardiopulmonary bypass techniques. In this article, the advances in minimally invasive surgical, cardiac anesthesia, and cardiopulmonary bypass techniques in the evolution of minimal access cardiac surgery are summarized.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.335 · 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