[Surgical treatment of elderly patients with pancreatic neoplasm].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To further elucidate the clinical feature, treatment and prognosis of pancreatic cancer in elderly patients. METHODS: Data of 180 elderly patients with pancreatic cancer operated upon during 1990-2000 were analyzed. Postoperative complications and 30-day mortality rates were recorded among the 46 cases subjective to Whipple procedure, including 22 cases undergoing regional pancreatoduodenectomy after intervention therapy. 78 patients received palliative surgery and 50 patients received laparotomy. Follow-up was made for 6 months to 10 years. RESULTS: All the patients were operated upon successfully. 48 patients underwent radical pancreatectomy with a mortality rate of 6.2 per cent, a complication rate of 20.8 per cent, and a mean survival period of 26 months. The 78 cases undergoing palliative surgery survived for 6 months on average. 54 patients undergoing laparotomy only survived for 3 months on average. CONCLUSION: Aggressive surgical management helps prolong the survival period and improve the life quality of elderly patients with pancreatic cancer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".