Retrospective review of 242 consecutive patients treated surgically for parotid gland tumours.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the trends and specific outcomes of patients treated surgically for parotid neoplasms between 1994 and 2005 with those of patients who were treated between 1985 and 1993 at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto and to identify preoperative indicators of malignancy. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed that included all patients who received treatment from 1994 to 2005 at Mount Sinai Hospital. The results of this review was compared with those of another group at the same institution. RESULTS: The study included 242 patients. Of these patients, 183 (75.6%) had benign neoplasms, 51 (21.1%) had malignant neoplasms, and 8 (3.3%) had inflammatory or lymphatic lesions. The most common associated symptoms were swelling (17.4%) and pain (16.5%). Only 5.8% of patients presented with facial weakness; however, the likelihood of malignancy was high (64.3%). Total parotidectomy was reserved for 26.4% of patients; the majority (68.2%) received a subtotal parotidectomy. Common postoperative complications included temporary facial nerve palsy (23.6%), Frey syndrome (12.4%), and salivary fistula (5.0%). Analysis of the correlation between fine-needle aspiration and final cytology revealed that fine-needle aspiration sensitivity and specificity were 60.0% and 96.1%, respectively. Comparison of these results with the other study at our institution revealed no significant differences in patient predictors or outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: These results were compared with those of a previous study conducted at the same institution between 1985 and 1993. There was no significant deviation from former trends. The presenting symptoms of facial nerve weakness and lymphadenopathy were found to be strong indicators of malignant disease. Facial pain was found not to be a reliable prognostic feature for malignancy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".