Hyposmia Following Laryngectomy: Experimental Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyposmia following laryngectomy is a well-known clinical observation, yet the causes have been controversial for many years. In an attempt to resolve this issue, an animal model was constructed. Eighteen dogs were divided into three equal groups: control dogs, dogs that underwent tracheostomy, and dogs that underwent tracheostomy and denervation of the larynx, simulating total laryngectomy. Four to 6 months following these operations, biopsies from olfactory mucosa were taken. The results showed marked changes in the olfactory mucosa of the two test groups: cystic degeneration of secretory glands in the olfactory mucosa of the first group and involution of the olfactory mucosa, substituted by dense connective tissue and "ballooning" of olfactory nerve fibres in the second group. These findings suggest that the changes in olfactory mucosa are not only caused by a loss of nasal airway but also the existence of a neurologic connecting network between the vagus nerve and the olfactory cortex.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".