MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964842635 · doi:10.1002/hed.25887

Transoral robotic surgery for head and neck malignancies: Imaging features in presurgical workup

2019· review· en· W2964842635 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin Y. M. Kwan, Nazir Mohammed Khan, John R. de Almeida, David P. Goldstein, Vinidh Paleri, Reza Forghani, Eugene Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueHead & Neck · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreMcGill UniversityQueen's UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransoral robotic surgeryMedicineHead and neckHead and neck cancerRadiologySurgeryMedical physicsRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this article was to review the indications for transoral robotic surgery (TORS) in head and neck malignancies. The role of imaging in patient selection will be specifically reviewed. TORS is a recently developed technique that allows minimally invasive surgeries to be performed in the head and neck. TORS has a role in the de-escalation of oropharyngeal cancers, which allows for lower doses of chemoradiation therapy (this is a technique currently in clinical trials). Additionally, this technique allows for less invasive surgery and decreases associated complications. TORS can also be performed at other subsites. Cross-sectional imaging has a prominent role to help identify suitable candidates for this type of surgery. This article will review important anatomy and staging related to TORS. Additionally, the key imaging features for patient selection (indications and contraindications) will be presented along with case illustrations.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations22
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHead & NeckSame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207