MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128093725 · doi:10.1002/hed.21461

Submandibular salivary gland transfer for the prevention of radiation‐induced xerostomia in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: 5‐Year outcomes

2010· article· en· W2128093725 on OpenAlexaff
Xuekui Liu, Yong Su, Naresh Jha, Ming‐Huan Hong, Hai‐Qiang Mai, Wei Fan, Zong‐Yuan Zeng, Zhu‐Ming Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueHead & Neck · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSalivary Gland Disorders and Functions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNasopharyngeal carcinomaSubmandibular glandSalivary glandMedicineSalivaIncidence (geometry)Radiation therapyDry mouthInternal medicineGastroenterologyOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Our aim in this study was to investigate the value of the submandibular salivary gland transfer procedure in prevention of radiation-induced xerostomia in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). METHODS: In all, there were 70 patients, consisting of a test group (36 patients) and a control group (34 patients) in a nonrandomized fashion. In the test group, the submandibular salivary gland was transferred to submental space before radiotherapy (XRT) and shielded. Salivary gland functions were evaluated by the amount of saliva and a quality of life questionnaire before and after XRT and 3 and 60 months after XRT. RESULTS: At 5 years, the trapping and excretion functions of salivary gland were significantly better in the test group (p = .000 and p = .000). The mean weight of saliva after XRT was heavier (1.65 g vs 0.73 g, p = .000), and the incidence of xerostomia was lower in the test group, with no difference in 5-year survival and neck nodal recurrence between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Salivary gland transfer procedure prevents XRT-induced xerostomia and improves quality of life of patients with NPC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations32
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHead & NeckSame topicSalivary Gland Disorders and FunctionsFrench-language works237,207