Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo object the efficacy of surgical treatment of metastatic spine disease.MethodsSix- teen patients under going surgery for spinal metastases were prospectively evaluated. Pre- and postoperative assess- ments were performed using the Edmonton sympton Assessment scale (ESAS) for Overall quality of life and Frankel Funtional Assessment for spinal cord function. Paired t tests were used to assess the significance of the difference between pre- and postoperative ESAS scores.ResultsThe average length of follow- up was 8.4 months (rang 3￣16 months). Among the 10 patients, 9 Patients gained one to three Frankel grade of nenrologic recorery. Six months af- ter surgery, The largest improvements was noted in the domain of pain, There were also statistically significant im- provements in the domains of tiredness, nausea, anxiety, appetite, and overall well- being.ConclusionIn the ap- proprate patients, Surgical management bring about a postive effect on the overall qulity of life and neurologic func- tion recovery by resection of spinal tumor and reconstruction of spinal stability.
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".