Functional Outcome After Lower Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcoma Treatment: A Pilot Study Based on Translated and Culturally Adapted Measures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The present standard of care in treating lower extremity soft tissue sarcomas is function-sparing, limb-preserving resection and reconstruction with or without oncological therapy. The aim of this pilot study was to test the suitability and adequacy of the Finnish translations of two functional outcome questionnaires (Toronto Extremity Salvage Score and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score) and to perform a preliminary investigation of functional outcomes of Finnish lower-limb soft tissue sarcoma patients after operative treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between June 2015 and December 2015, consecutive surgically treated outpatients were asked to participate in the study. Demographic, clinical, surgical, and oncological outcome data were collected. Two functional outcome questionnaires were used (Toronto Extremity Salvage Score and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores). A comparative analysis is presented. RESULTS: A total of 19 lower-limb soft tissue sarcoma patients with a mean follow-up time of 2 years and 10 months were included. All (n = 19) invited patients participated in the study. Mean age was 62.3 years. In total, 13 had high-grade sarcomas. Eight wounds were closed directly, four used skin grafts, and five required flap reconstructions. One patient required a tumor prosthesis, and one required a rotationplasty. A total of 14 patients received oncological therapy. No problems or difficulties were reported in using and completing the Finnish versions of the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score or Musculoskeletal Tumor Society questionnaires. The overall Toronto Extremity Salvage Score and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores were 88 and 76, respectively. CONCLUSION: This pilot study suggests that the Finnish versions of the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society questionnaires are suitable for measuring functional outcome after lower extremity soft tissue sarcomas treatment. Functional outcomes vary from moderate to excellent.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".