Surgical Management of Lumbar Degenerative Spinal Stenosis with Spondylolisthesis via Posterior Reduction with Minimal Laminectomy
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis is commonly treated with laminectomy. Recent reports have consistently supported the incremental clinical benefit of associated in situ arthrodesis with or without instrumentation. Resection of the lamina may result in intraoperative dural tear or epidural scar formation. Fifty-six consecutive patients with back pain, neuroclaudication, or both, in addition to degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis, underwent a surgical procedure that incorporated fusion after reduction of the spondylolisthesis deformity with preservation of the lamina and the balance of the posterior elements. Clinical records were reviewed and patients interviewed at a mean of 33 months after surgery. Oswestry Disability Index scores were obtained independently at baseline and at a late review. Late imaging was available a mean of 28 months after operation. Clinical and imaging analyses and Oswestry scoring confirmed results comparable to the published outcomes of in situ fusion after formal laminectomy. Resection of the lamina may not be necessary in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with spondylolisthesis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it