MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063815977 · doi:10.1016/j.ijscr.2015.01.015

Hybrid resection of a giant thigh plexiform neurofibroma

2015· article· en· W2063815977 on OpenAlexaff
Shimon Kolker, Jay S. Wunder, Graham Roche‐Nagle

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Surgery Case Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma Cases
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlexiform neurofibromaNeurofibromatosisDisfigurementNeurofibromaSurgeryThighEmbolizationMalignant transformationMultidisciplinary teamRadiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PRESENTATION OF CASE: Authors present a case of a 55 year old patient with Type 1 neurofibromatosis (NF1) and a very large right thigh plexiform neurofibroma. The patient had increasing difficulty with mobilization due to this enlarging bulky mass. Preoperative embolization reduced the bleeding risk at surgery allowing successful gross resection of the mass by a multidisciplinary surgical team. Limb function was restored to normal. DISCUSSION: Massive plexiform neurofibromatosis is a rare expression of von Recklinghausen's disease or NF1. These large masses result in severe disfigurement and significant functional disability. They are extremely vascular and there is potential for malignant transformation. CONCLUSION: These massive tumors require complex preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative management strategies with involvement from a multidisplinary team. We discuss the challenges of surgical intervention and to discuss the current literature.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Surgery Case ReportsSame topicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma CasesFrench-language works237,207