MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108304185 · doi:10.1007/s11552-013-9567-9

Concomitant Upper Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcoma Limb-Sparing Resection and Functional Reconstruction: Assessment of Outcomes and Costs of Surgery

2013· article· en· W2108304185 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHand · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgerySoft tissueConcomitantElbowUpper limbSoft tissue sarcomaSarcomaForearm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to investigate functional outcomes and cost impacts of immediate functional reconstruction performed in conjunction with limb-sparing resection of upper extremity soft tissue sarcomas. METHODS: Patients undergoing simultaneous limb-sparing upper extremity soft tissue sarcoma resection and functional reconstruction between December 1998 and March 2004 were retrospectively identified, their medical records reviewed, and costs of surgery analyzed. Functional outcomes and patient satisfaction were assessed via patient surveys and the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS). RESULTS: Thirteen patients met the inclusion criteria. Average follow-up was 43.3 months. Reconstructions included rotational innervated muscle flaps (n = 6), free innervated myocutaneous flaps (n = 1), and tendon transfers or grafts (n = 6). Overall survival was 85 % (n = 11) and disease-free survival was 77 % (n = 10). Average total cost of surgery was $26,655. Patients undergoing reconstruction for hand and forearm sarcomas had significantly higher total costs of surgery than those undergoing reconstruction for elbow and upper arm sarcomas. Survey response rate was 91 % (n = 10). Average TESS score was 76. Of the patients who worked preoperatively, 88 % returned to work postoperatively, and all patients who returned to work currently use their affected limb at work. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing immediate functional reconstruction for upper extremity soft tissue sarcoma resection achieved very good to excellent functional outcomes with quick recovery times and a high return-to-work rate following immediate functional reconstruction, thereby minimizing surgical cost impacts. Immediate functional reconstruction in the same surgical setting is thus a viable strategy following upper extremity soft tissue sarcoma resection.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.255 · 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