MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073905433 · doi:10.1097/scs.0b013e3181506477

An Experimental Model of Traumatic Nasoethmoidal Cerebrospinal Fluid Fistula

2008· article· en· W2073905433 on OpenAlexaff
Galip Zihni Sanuş, Fatma Özlen, Hüseyin Biçeroğlu, Cihan İşler, Taner Tanrıverdi, Ahmet Baş, Sait Albayram, Mehmet Yaşar Kaynar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Craniofacial Surgery · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Surgical Oncology
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCerebrospinal fluidFistulaComputed tomographyRadiologyAnimal modelSurgeryPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cerebrospinal fluid fistula secondary to head trauma is a potentially dangerous problem and precise localization and radical treatment is mandatory. The diagnostic technique is either computed tomography cisternography or MR cisternography. For evaluating the safety of diagnostic modalities and efficacy of treatment especially in terms of surgery, animal studies demonstrating traumatic cerebrospinal fistula model are indispensable not only for neurosurgeons but also for neuroradiologists. The authors in this paper describe a traumatic cerebrospinal fistula in an animal model using rabbits. The cerebrospinal fluid leakage was demonstrated successfully in all eight rabbits and was verified by computed tomography cisternography. The results led us to conclude that rabbit model of traumatic cerebrospinal fluid fistula is safe and has low mortality and morbidity rates. Further studies including larger number of animals should be considered in order to verify safety more accurately.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Craniofacial SurgerySame topicHead and Neck Surgical OncologyFrench-language works237,207