MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120550524 · doi:10.1017/s0022215110001003

Outcome of endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis patients: a Canadian experience

2010· article· en· W2120550524 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yahya Al Badaai, M Samaha

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Laryngology & Otology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSinusitis and nasal conditions
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityRoyal Victoria Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChronic rhinosinusitisSinusitisQuality of life (healthcare)Functional endoscopic sinus surgeryChronic sinusitisAsthmaProspective cohort studyCohortSurgeryCohort studyEndoscopic sinus surgeryChronic diseaseDiseasePhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect on patients' quality of life of functional endoscopic sinus surgery performed for chronic rhinosinusitis within a tertiary care centre in Montreal, Canada. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was undertaken. Subjects were consecutive patients with a diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis who had failed medical treatment and were undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Questionnaires assessing general health outcomes (i.e. the second version of the Short Form 12 questionnaire) and disease-specific outcomes (i.e. the Chronic Sinusitis Survey) were completed pre-operatively and a minimum of three months post-operatively. RESULTS: A total of 152 patients were enrolled over a seven-month period, of whom 120 completed the post-operative surveys. The most common co-morbidity was asthma (40 per cent). Of the 120 patients with completed questionnaires, 72 per cent reported clinical improvement, 12 per cent reported deterioration and 15 per cent remained unchanged. The average improvement in Chronic Sinusitis Survey score was 17 per cent. CONCLUSION: Patients with chronic rhinosinusitis achieved a significant improvement in disease-specific quality of life after functional endoscopic sinus surgery. There was no significant improvement in general health related quality of life, as measured using the Short Form 12 questionnaire.

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)0.001
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.298
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

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Laryngology & OtologySame topicSinusitis and nasal conditionsFrench-language works237,207