Bibliographic record
Abstract
VATS lobectomy is a safe and effective treatment strategy for operable stage I and II lung cancer. It has a similar five-year survival compared to open lobectomy (thoracotomy). VATS lobectomy is associated with less postoperative complications and shorter hospital length of stay when compared to lobectomy by thoracotomy. VATS lobectomy has not been widely adopted by the thoracic surgical community, in part, due to technical reasons. Pulmonary artery branch manipulation in VATS lobectomy is one of the most critical parts of the procedure, especially when endostaplers are used for ligation and division of the vessel. Energy devices have improved in recent years, and their application for VATS lobectomy is gaining traction. There is more and more evidence supporting the safety of ultrasonic shears to seal and divide small pulmonary artery branches. These devices are smaller and finer than endostaplers and have the potential to reduce the risk of PA injury. These more user-friendly devices may enable thoracic surgeons who are currently performing lobectomy by thoracotomy to transition to VATS. Energy devices are also useful for hilar dissection and mediastinal lymph node dissection in VATS lobectomy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".