Impact of vertical dome division on nasal airflow.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Vertical dome division is an effective maneuver in nasal tip surgery. Its applications include reduction of the tip projection, increasing tip rotation, narrowing of the domal arch, and correction of lobule asymmetry. Nevertheless, some surgeons avoid this technique, fearing tip deformity and possibly impaired nasal airflow. RESULTS: In this study, nasal airflow measurements were made before and after septorhinoplasty with vertical dome division. There was no significant change in the airflow before and after septorhinoplasty with vertical dome division. The airflow was negatively affected in 37.5% and improved postoperatively in 25% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite objective findings of diminished nasal airflow in some patients following vertical dome division, no subjective correlation was identified. Furthermore, during the postoperative testing, alar retraction on all of these patients failed to normalize airflow results, indicating that alar collapse was not contributing to the airflow impairment in those cases. All of the patients were found clinically asymptomatic after surgery.
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".