MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033777596 · doi:10.1186/s12917-020-02343-1

Schedule feasibility and workflow for additive manufacturing of titanium plates for cranioplasty in canine skull tumors

2020· article· en· W3033777596 on OpenAlex
Jordan James, Michelle L. Oblak, Alex R. zur Linden, Fiona James, Julie Phillips, Matt Parkes

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Veterinary Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsSheridan CollegeUniversity of Guelph
FundersOVC Pet Trust
KeywordsCranioplastyWorkflowMedicineSkullTitaniumDICOMBiomedical engineeringSurgeryComputer scienceRadiologyMaterials scienceDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Additive manufacturing has allowed for the creation of a patient-specific custom solution that can resolve many of the limitations previously reported for canine cranioplasty. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine the schedule feasibility and workflow in manufacturing patient-specific titanium implants for canines undergoing cranioplasty immediately following craniectomy. RESULTS: Computed tomography scans from patients with tumors of the skull were considered and 3 cases were selected. Images were imported into a DICOM image processing software and tumor margins were determined based on agreement between a board-certified veterinary radiologist and veterinary surgical oncologist. Virtual surgical planning was performed and a bone safety margin was selected. A defect was created to simulate the planned intraoperative defect. Stereolithography format files of the skulls were then imported into a plate design software. In collaboration with a medical solution centre, a custom titanium plate was designed with the input of an applications engineer and veterinary surgery oncologist. Plates were printed in titanium and post-processed at the solution centre. Total planning time was approximately 2 h with a manufacturing time of 2 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of this study, with access to an advanced 3D metal printing medical solution centre that can provide advanced software and printing, patient-specific additive manufactured titanium implants can be planned, created, processed, shipped and sterilized for patient use within a 3-week turnaround.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.472
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.195 · 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