MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094059176 · doi:10.1002/hed.21154

Laryngeal reconstruction following CO<sub>2</sub> laser surgery for glottic cancer

2009· review· en· W2094059176 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Cavanagh, Robert D. Hart, Timothy S. Brown, Jonathan Trites, Maria K. Brake, S. Mark Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueHead & Neck · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTransoral laser microsurgeryGlottisLaser surgeryHead and neck cancerSurgeryReconstructive surgeryHead and neckLarynxLaryngeal NeoplasmLaserRadiation therapyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CO(2) laser has become a common surgical technique in the management of glottic cancer. The patients treated with this modality may benefit from additional phonosurgical techniques used to improve postoperative vocal outcome.The aim of this article was to review those phonosurgical techniques described for glottic reconstruction after CO(2) laser excision of glottic cancer. The indications for using each technique are discussed, with particular attention paid to functional outcomes following these reconstructive efforts.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.

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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHead & NeckSame topicVoice and Speech DisordersFrench-language works237,207