MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2402588817

Batting .500: experience with the fibular free flap in the achondroplastic patient.

2009· article· en· W2402588817 on OpenAlexaff
S. Mark Taylor, Jonathan Trites, Joseph G. Nasser

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicConnective tissue disorders research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHumanitiesFree flapGynecologyPhilosophySurgery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To describe the use of the fibular free flap in the achondroplastic patient and to report the potential pitfalls of free flap surgery on this group of patients. DESIGN: Retrospective chart analysis. METHODS: We reviewed our experience with two fibular free flaps in this rare situation. RESULTS: This is the largest series of fibular free flaps reported on the achondroplastic patient. An acute adrenal event resulted in hypothermia and hypotension and ultimately led to the failure of our first reconstructive attempt. Corrective measures were taken during the secondary reconstruction to prevent these systemic issues from coming into play, which ultimately led to a successful free fibular transfer. CONCLUSION: Free fibular transfer is possible for facial reconstruction in the achondroplastic patient, and success can be improved if measures are taken to prevent systemic complications of hypothermia and hypotension in the case of an acute adrenal event.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicConnective tissue disorders researchFrench-language works237,207