Location of parathyroid adenomas: 7-year experience.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the most common location of parathyroid adenomas. METHODS: Data from 147 patients who underwent parathyroidectomy for primary hyperparathyroidism in Montreal at a McGill University teaching hospital between January 2001 and January 2008 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients with histopathologic confirmation of parathyroid hyperplasia were excluded from the study (n = 26). The 121 patients with confirmed adenomas were grouped according to the locations of the tumour into right superior, right inferior, left superior, left inferior, and ectopic. RESULTS: The left inferior parathyroid glands were the most common site of adenomas. This was the case for 50 patients (41.32% [mean 0.41; 95% CI 0.324-0.506]). The right inferior parathyroid glands were the site in 40 patients (33.06% [mean 0.33; 95% CI 0.248-0.422]). The remainder of the adenomas were distributed as follows: the left superior in 19 patients (15.7% [mean 0.157; 95% CI 0.097-0.234]), the right superior in 10 patients (8.26% [mean 0.0826; 95% CI 0.040-0.147]), and the ectopic in 2 patients (1.65% [mean 0.0165; 95% CI 0.002-0.058]). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the most common site of adenoma was the left inferior parathyroid gland. This information provides parathyroid surgeons with a starting point when imaging fails to localize the site of the adenoma, which allows for the possibility of minimally invasive surgery especially if used in conjunction with intraoperative parathyroid hormone.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".