The neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio predicts major perioperative complications in patients undergoing colorectal surgery
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
AIM: The objective of the study was to evaluate the association between the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the occurrence of perioperative complications in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. METHOD: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients who underwent resection for suspected or confirmed colorectal cancer from 2004 to 2012. Patient cohorts with a high vs low NLR were defined by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to determine whether patients with elevated NLR were more likely to suffer perioperative complications. RESULTS: In all, 583 patients were included. A preoperative NLR greater than or equal to 2.3 was significantly associated with a major perioperative complication (OR 2.52, 95% CI 1.26-5.01). On multivariate analysis, a high NLR (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.12-4.52) and Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 3 (OR 4.55, 95% CI 2.17-9.56) were significantly related to major morbidity. No relationships were found between an elevated preoperative NLR and complication type, although there was a trend towards the occurrence of anastomotic leakage. CONCLUSION: Preoperative NLR ≥ 2.3 may be a risk factor for major surgical complications following colorectal resection. Further study is needed to validate this threshold and evaluate the clinical implications of these findings.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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