MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323346172 · doi:10.1097/sap.0000000000000713

Surgical Correction of Nonsyndromic Sagittal Craniosynostosis

2016· review· en· W2323346172 on OpenAlex
Andrew Simpson, Alison Wong, Michael Bezuhly

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

VenueAnnals of Plastic Surgery · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCraniofacial Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCraniosynostosisMedicineCraniosynostosesCraniofacialSkullSagittal sutureSurgerySagittal planePerioperativeMagnetic resonance imagingRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sagittal craniosynostosis remains the most common type of isolated craniosynostosis, accounting for nearly half of all nonsyndromic cases. The clinical diagnosis is typically made on the basis of a scaphocephalic head shape and is confirmed by computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. The current review examines the major surgical options for correction of isolated sagittal craniosynostosis, including their complications and short- and long-term outcomes. Reconstructive techniques have benefited from advances in perioperative anesthesia monitoring and improved safety of blood transfusion. Although extensive calvarial remodeling is considered safe and may confer greater long-term skull shape correction and decreased neuropsychological sequelae, minimally invasive techniques, such as device-assisted expansion of the cranium continue to increase in popularity. This review underscores the need for additional prospective studies comparing different techniques to determine the optimal reconstructive approach for correction of sagittal craniosynostosis.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.280 · 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