MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

MP04-09 PREDICTORS OF SURGICAL COMPLICATIONS AND EVALUATION OF OUTCOMES AFTER SURGICAL CORRECTION OF ADULT ACQUIRED BURIED PENIS

2019· article· en· W2941476863 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mélanie Aubé-Peterkin, Michael Chua, Jessica DeLong, Jeremy Tonkin, David Gilbert, Kurt McCammon, Ramón Virasoro

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenital Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryRetrospective cohort studyPhalloplastyGeneral surgeryPenis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

single-use device is ready-to-use whenever needed without delay avoiding the wait for specialist instruments or equipment.METHODS: We evaluated the usefulness of the (UCDÒ) in our GURS-patient cohort when problematic catheterization in complex lower urinary tract (LUT) reconstruction was encountered and standard Foley-catheterization was not feasible and recorded any adverse events related to intra-operative UCD-catheterization.We recorded how often we used the device and how fast the catheterization difficulty was resolved.RESULTS: 16 men with failed standard Foley-catheterization after various complex LUT-GURS were catheterized with the (UCDÒ) without adverse events.In 15 of 16 (94%) UCD-catheterization was successful first-pass.In 1 of 16 (6%) the UCD-guidewire first turned, but the second insertion attempt was successful and no cystoscopic catheterization was necessary.In addition, one patient could receive bladder irrigation using the (UCDÒ).Managing problematic intraoperative urethral catheterization with the UCDÒ was time efficient resolving the problem in <5min in 94% of cases, excluding the time it took to collect the sterile consumable from the storeroom.CONCLUSIONS: The UCDÒ is a useful catheter device solving problematic urethral catheterization in complex GURS avoiding extra theatre time with patient care delay and potential risk of urethral catheterisation injury and traumatic damage to the complex LUT reconstruction.The UCDÒ is cost effective and time efficient providing safe patient care.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.003

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Urology→Same topicGenital Health and Disease→French-language works237,207→