MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094989623 · doi:10.1002/hed.23006

Physical morbidity by surgical approach and tumor location in skull base surgery

2012· article· en· W2094989623 on OpenAlexafffund
John R. de Almeida, Ian Witterick, Patrick Gullane, Fred Gentili, Lynne Lohfeld, Jolie Ringash, Allan Vescan

Bibliographic record

VenueHead & Neck · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Surgical Oncology
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersPhysicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
KeywordsMedicineSkullSurgeryEndocrine systemOdds ratioReduction (mathematics)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Skull base tumors are associated with physical symptoms that vary depending on location and surgical approach. METHODS: Skull base surgery patients (n = 138) were retrospectively reviewed and physical symptoms were quantified. Patients were divided into 4 groups by surgical approach (open, endoscopic) and tumor location (anterior, central). Multivariate analyses determined odds for symptom development. RESULTS: Patients with anterior lesions presented with more nasal symptoms compared to those with central lesions (63% vs 6.8%; p < .001). Those with central lesions presented with more neurologic (41.1% vs 12.3%; p < .001) and endocrine symptoms (19.2% vs 0%; p < .001). Three of 4 groups experienced a reduction in neurologic and visual symptoms after surgery. One group (endoscopic/central) experienced a reduction in endocrine and an increase in nasal symptoms. Anterior tumors (p = .02) and endoscopic approaches (p = .002) predicted increased nasal morbidity. CONCLUSION: Physical morbidity from skull base tumors may vary based on tumor location and surgical approach.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations28
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHead & NeckSame topicHead and Neck Surgical OncologyFrench-language works237,207