MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2725629681 · doi:10.1097/icb.0000000000000609

NOVEL PATIENT POSITIONING APPARATUS FOR RETINAL SURGERY IN A CASE OF SEVERE KYPHOSIS

2017· article· en· W2725629681 on OpenAlexaff
Douglas S.M. Iaboni, Mark E. Seamone, Mary S. Stairs, Daniel M. O’Brien, M Bisson, R. Rishi Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueRetinal Cases & Brief Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraoperative Neuromonitoring and Anesthetic Effects
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePars planaOperating tableVitrectomyScleral buckleSurgeryKyphosisRetinal detachmentOphthalmologyAnkylosing spondylitisRetinalVisual acuityRadiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To describe a novel patient positioning apparatus for intraocular surgery capable of accommodating patients with thoracic kyphosis. METHODS: Case report. RESULTS: A 60-year-old man presented with a macula-off retinal detachment and severe ankylosing spondylitis. The patient was scheduled for combined pars plana vitrectomy and scleral buckle. Because of the patient's severe kyphosis, a custom-designed positioning apparatus was built. The setup involved a canvas with 10 sewn-on straps and a Skytron operating table with strap inserts. Padding and blankets were also used to secure the patient comfortably in the Trendelenburg position. Surgery was uncomplicated and retinal detachment repair was successfully performed. CONCLUSION: To the authors' knowledge, this is the first report detailing a vest-like support apparatus for patients with thoracic kyphosis used in vitreoretinal surgery. This apparatus can be prepared using any conventional operating table, and it offers an effective approach to intraocular surgery for patients who cannot lie flat.

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)0.002
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRetinal Cases & Brief ReportsSame topicIntraoperative Neuromonitoring and Anesthetic EffectsFrench-language works237,207