MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062146513 · doi:10.1007/s002680020011

Recurrence of Hydatid Disease

2001· review· en· W2062146513 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy D. Sielaff, Bryce Taylor, Bernard Langer

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Surgery · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParasitic infections in humans and animals
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlbendazoleMedicineAsymptomaticSurgeryDiseaseCardiothoracic surgeryHydatid cystCystAbdominal surgeryRadiologyVascular surgeryCardiac surgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surgical management of hepatic hydatid disease has been associated with an overall local recurrence rate of approximately 10%. Local recurrence is rarely seen following complete resection of an intact cyst and is usually the result of spillage of live parasites or leaving a residual cyst wall containing germinal epithelium, daughter cysts, or protoscolices during surgery. Recurrence is frequently asymptomatic, so the diagnosis depends on dedicated follow-up of treated patients with serology and either ultrasonography or computed tomography. The management of locally recurrent disease should include administration of albendazole followed by the appropriate application of interventional radiotherapy or operation. As with the treatment of primary disease, the preservation of liver function and minimizing the risk to the patient remain the guiding principles of therapy of local recurrence.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations186
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of SurgerySame topicParasitic infections in humans and animalsFrench-language works237,207