MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004834426 · doi:10.1055/s-0040-1702474

The Importance of Long-Term Follow-up after Endoscopic Pituitary Surgery: Durability of Results and Tumor Recurrence

2020· article· en· W3004834426 on OpenAlexaff
João Paulo Almeida, Hirokazu Takami, Raha Tabasinejad, Miguel Marigil Sánchez, Carlos Velásquez, Gelareh Zadeh, Fred Gentili

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurological Surgery Part B Skull Base · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTerm (time)Pituitary adenomaResectionTranssphenoidal surgerySeries (stratigraphy)Radiological weaponPituitary tumorsSurgeryGeneral surgeryAdenomaInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery (ETS) has become the preferred surgical approach for resection of pituitary adenomas in most centers. This technique has a series of advantages such as improved visualization and maneuverability when compared with microscopic transsphenoidal approach. However, long-term results are still scarce. Ten years ago, we published our initial series with short-term results. This project aims to revisit the results of that series, assessing now the long-term results regarding radiological recurrence of pituitary adenomas.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurological Surgery Part B Skull BaseSame topicPituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207