MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922087070 · doi:10.1089/end.2019.0085

Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Access: A Systematic Review of Intraoperative Assistive Technologies

2019· review· en· W2922087070 on OpenAlexaff
David‐Dan Nguyen, Jack W. Luo, Thomas Tailly, Naeem Bhojani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endourology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPercutaneous nephrolithotomyMedicineGold standard (test)PercutaneousModalitiesNephrostomyMedical physicsKidney diseaseSurgeryNephrologyRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the current gold standard for the treatment of large and complex renal stone disease. It is a complex procedure that requires skill and experience. The most challenging step and key requisite of a successful PCNL is establishing optimal access to the renal collecting system with imaging modalities. To increase safety and efficacy in this crucial step, and with ongoing advancements in current technology, several aids have been developed to assist the urologist and help accurately guide the needle to the target. The goal of this systematic review was to identify and discuss these innovations.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EndourologySame topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207