MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2590938314 · doi:10.1177/2513826x1500100103

Crossing Osteotomies and Rib Transposition for Coverage of a Moderate-Size Bony Thoracic Defect

2015· article· en· W2590938314 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Karan Chopra, Bryan Buckingham, Kashyap Komarraju Tadisina, Nina N. Semsarzadeh, Devinder Singh, Luther H. Holton

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic Surgery Case Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma Management and Diagnosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRib cageMedicineThoracic wallTransposition (logic)SurgeryAnatomyGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Full-thickness defects of the chest wall are managed based on the principle of restoring structure and function. Characteristics of the lesion, such as size, location and etiology, as well as its resultant effects on pulmonary mechanics govern the surgical approach to reconstruction. Defects of intermediate size, however, occupy a gray area in thoracic wall reconstruction, with no clear consensus on management. The authors describe a novel method of providing bony coverage for a moderate-size thoracic wall defect in a patient with a complex intrathoracic, extrapleural hernia by crossing osteotomies in addition to transposition and fixation of ribs. Osseous rib Z-plasty is a novel surgical technique that may be considered to be a valid alternative for reconstruction of selected moderate-size, full-thickness defects of the lateral rib cage. Knowledge of this technique is recommended for thoracic, trauma and plastic surgeons who are likely to encounter and manage such defects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlastic Surgery Case StudiesSame topicTrauma Management and DiagnosisFrench-language works237,207