MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Functional Outcomes After Primary Oropharyngeal Cancer Resection and Reconstruction With the Radial Forearm Free Flap

2003· article· en· W2140161843 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Laryngoscope · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsMisericordia Community HospitalAlberta Cancer FoundationUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSwallowingSoft palateTongueSurgeryForearmReconstructive surgeryIntelligibility (philosophy)Free flap

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To report prospectively collected aeromechanical, acoustical, and perceptual speech outcomes, as well as preliminary swallowing data, in patients having reconstruction with radial forearm free flaps after primary resection for oropharyngeal cancer. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: Acoustical, aeromechanical, and perceptual speech data and swallowing data were gathered at three evaluation times (preoperatively and before and after radiation therapy) for patients treated for oropharyngeal cancer by means of primary resection and reconstruction with a radial forearm free flap. Degree of involvement of the soft palate and base of tongue, along with reconstructive techniques, were entered as between-group factors in the analysis. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in speech intelligibility between the patient groups based on the degree of palate and tongue resected. However, patients with resections of half or more than half of the soft palate had significantly higher nasalance values and larger velopharyngeal orifice areas than individuals who had less than half of the soft palate resected. Significant within-subject differences were revealed across evaluation times for the dependent variables nasalance, velopharyngeal orifice area, and word intelligibility. Ninety-four percent of the patients were able to resume a normal or soft diet. There was a 6% incidence of aspiration in 128 swallows that were analyzed. The amount of base of tongue resected did not significantly affect any of the speech or swallowing parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Radial forearm free flaps are a good reconstructive option after oropharyngeal cancer extirpation. Our acoustic and aeromechanical results indicated that issues related to quality of the speech signal require further study for resections of half or more than half of the soft palate.

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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.220 · 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