MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903356818 · doi:10.2147/tcrm.s183612

Total endoscopic thyroidectomy versus conventional open thyroidectomy in thyroid cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2018· review· en· W2903356818 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTherapeutics and Clinical Risk Management · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid and Parathyroid Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineSeromaThyroidectomyCochrane LibraryThyroid cancerRecurrent laryngeal nerveMeta-analysisPapillary thyroid cancerSurgeryHematomaSystematic reviewThyroidInternal medicineMEDLINEComplication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Despite the considerable experience gained thus far using endoscopic technologies, the role of total endoscopic thyroidectomy (ET) for papillary thyroid cancer (PTC) remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the safety and effectiveness of total ET compared with conventional open thyroidectomy (OT) in PTC. Methods: A systematic search was conducted using the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library electronic databases up to March 2018. The quality of included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Review Manager software version 5.3 was used for the meta-analysis. Results: Twelve studies including 2,672 patients were ultimately included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. ET was associated with longer operative time ( P <0.00001), drainage time ( P <0.00001) and hospital stay ( P =0.03), higher transient recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) palsy rate ( P =0.004) and a greater amount of drainage fluid ( P <0.0001) compared with OT. Furthermore, no significant differences were detected between ET and OT in terms of retrieved lymph nodes ( P =0.17), blood loss ( P =0.22), transient hypocalcemia ( P =0.84), permanent hypocalcemia ( P =0.58), permanent RLN palsy ( P =0.14), hematoma or bleeding ( P =0.15) and seroma ( P =0.54). In addition, the rates of tumor recurrence were comparable ( P =0.18), whereas the proportions of stimulated thyroglobulin levels <1 ng/mL measured after completion of thyroidectomy and radioactive iodine therapy were less ( P =0.02) in the ET than in the OT group. Conclusion: ET is not superior to OT in terms of operation and drainage time, amount of drainage fluid, hospital stay or transient RLN palsy, but is comparable to OT in terms of retrieved lymph nodes and permanent complications. Despite the similar tumor recurrence rates between the two approaches, the level of surgical completeness in ET may not be as good as that for OT. Keywords: endoscopic thyroidectomy, conventional open thyroidectomy, papillary thyroid carcinoma, meta-analysis

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.217
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.259 · 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