MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468715978 · doi:10.1177/1203475416658289

How Mohs Surgery Transformed Into a First-Line Treatment of Skin Cancer

2016· article· en· W2468715978 on OpenAlexaff
Rob Bobotsis, Lyn Guenther

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsGuenther Dermatology Research CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMohs surgerySkin cancerDiscontinuationDermatologyDermatologic surgerySurgeryBasal cell carcinomaGeneral surgeryCancerPathologyBasal cellInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mohs surgery is considered ideal treatment for many types of skin cancers. Developed by Dr Frederic Edward Mohs (1910-2002), Mohs surgery allows all surgical margins to be viewed microscopically, ensuring no cancer cells go unremoved, yet it failed to achieve immediate acceptance when first introduced in the 1940s. A catalyst to the widespread acceptance of Mohs surgery occurred with the work of dermatologic colleagues who reported excellent results without using the paste. It suggested the real innovation of Mohs surgery lay in its microscopic control and not the paste, the discontinuation of which removed all the problems associated with its use.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and SurgerySame topicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207