The Taylor saddle effacement: a new technique for correction of saddle nose deformity.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe a novel technique, the Taylor saddle effacement (TSE), for correction of saddle nose deformity using autologous grafts from the lower lateral cartilages. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A prospective evaluation of six patients, all of whom had the TSE performed. Photographs were taken in combination with completion of a rhinoplasty outcomes questionnaire preoperatively and at 6 months. The questionnaire included a visual analogue scale (VAS) of nasal breathing and a rhinoplasty outcomes evaluation (ROE) of nasal function and esthetics. RESULTS: All six patients had improvement in both their global nasal airflow on the VAS and on their ROE that was statistically significant. The mean preoperative VAS score was 5.8 compared with our postoperative mean of 8.5 of a possible 10. Mean ROE scores improved from 34.7 to 85.5. At 6 months, all patients felt that their nasal appearance had improved. CONCLUSION: The TSE is a simple and reliable technique for correction of saddle nose deformity. This prospective study has demonstrated improvement in both nasal function and esthetics when it is employed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".