Management of goitre and small nodule disease by Canadian otolaryngologists.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe current management practices among Canadian otolaryngologists for small thyroid nodule disease and nodules in the context of goitre. METHODS: An online survey was e-mailed to all active members of the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (CSOHNS). The responses were anonymous. Information was gathered on practice demographics and individual practices pertaining to diagnostic workup, surgical management, and follow-up of patients with goitre and small nodule disease. RESULTS: A total of 113 surveys were returned from 431 active CSOHNS members (26% response). The majority of respondents were less than 40 years (54%), resided in Ontario or Quebec (63%), and described their practice as academic (65%). Management of a small thyroid nodule following fine-needle aspiration cytology results reported as benign, nondiagnostic, abnormal, or papillary thyroid cancer was inconsistent. Papillary thyroid cancer was managed by total thyroidectomy (59%), total thyroidectomy plus level VI neck dissection (38%), hemithyroidectomy plus level VI neck dissection (2%), and hemithyroidectomy (1%). Management of goitre was not uniform. Symptomatic goitre management included discharge from practice (6%), follow-up with serial ultrasonography (12%), hemithyroidectomy (15%), and total thyroidectomy (66%). Practice demographics had a significant effect on intraoperative techniques, such as the use of an electromyographic nerve monitor. CONCLUSION: There was a lack of consensus among Canadian otolaryngologists regarding treatment of small thyroid nodules and nodules in the context of goitre. Canadian guidelines for management of small nodule disease may standardize care.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".