Clinical evaluation of an automated virtual surgical planning platform for mandibular reconstruction
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Virtual surgical planning (VSP), via commercial services or developed in-house, has been applied to facilitate head and neck reconstruction. We evaluate a custom, automated planning software. METHODS: Prospectively, VSP of 25 consecutive patients undergoing segmental mandibular reconstruction was performed. Postoperative CT was used to assess structural accuracy of VSP. Operative time, length of stay, and complication rate of the prospective cohort were compared with those of 25 consecutive retrospective historical cases. RESULTS: The deviations between the plan and execution in mandibular width, projection, and volumetric overlap were 2.32 ± 3.91, 2.39 ± 1.72, and 0.59 ± 0.51 mm respectively. Compared with historical data, there was a significant reduction in operative time and length of stay, and no significant difference in complication rates. CONCLUSION: This is the largest prospective series evaluating an in-house VSP workflow for mandibular reconstruction and the first clinical evaluation of an automated planning platform.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it