MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108846244 · doi:10.1111/vsu.13535

Influence of skull biometrics on cosmetic reconstruction after incisivectomy and nasal planectomy reconstruction in dogs

2020· article· en· W3108846244 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Surgery · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Facial Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhiltrumMedicineSkullAnatomyMaxillaCadaverRhinoplastyNoseOrthodonticsDentistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To identify biometric skull measurements that are associated with tension and excess narrowing of the resultant nasal aperture during cosmetic nasal planectomy reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN: Ex vivo study. ANIMALS: Twenty cadavers of mesocephalic dogs. METHODS: Cosmetic reconstruction was performed after incisivectomy and nasal planectomy. Preoperative and intraoperative skull measurements included width of the nasal planum, rostral and caudal maxilla, labial flap, and maxilla at ostectomy site; the length of the nose, labial flap, and philtrum incision; lip thickness; and philtrum placement. Ratios of select width to length measurements were calculated. Correlation was tested between skull biometrics and tension during reconstruction as well as resulting opening of the nasal aperture. RESULTS: Breeds included golden retriever, pit bull, Labrador retriever, beagle, shepherd, basset hound, boxer mix, cocker spaniel, and Great Dane. No biometric ratios were predictive of procedural success. The most important objective measurements that were significantly correlated with inferior outcome included width of the nasal planum (>3 cm), width of the caudal maxilla (>6.2 cm), lip thickness (>0.5 cm), width of the labial flap (>2.9 cm), length of the incision created to make the cosmetic "philtrum" (longer incisions >2.8 cm), and philtrum placement (more dorsal placement). CONCLUSION: Tension during reconstruction and decreased resultant nasal aperture were associated with wider facial features and thicker lips as well as directly impacted by cosmetic philtrum design and placement. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Standardized preoperative measurements may help guide clinical decision making in choosing and executing a nasal planectomy reconstructive technique.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.236 · 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