Use of Propensity Score Matching to Compare Short Outcomes from Transoral and External Surgical Approaches in Patients with Deep-Lobe Parotid Pleomorphic Adenomas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To compare the outcomes of patients who had deep-lobe parotid gland pleomorphic adenomas (PAs) that extended into the parapharyngeal space after surgical treatment, using a transoral approach or an external approach. One hundred and twelve eligible patients, with deep-lobe parotid gland PAs, were enrolled in this retrospective study. The surgical outcomes were compared for patients who received a transoral approach and an external approach, using 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). The outcome measures were recurrence rate, facial nerve deficit, Frey’s syndrome, and hospitalization time. The median follow-up time was 4.8 years. After PSM, the transoral approach and external approach groups had no statistically significant difference in recurrence (10.3% vs. 3.4%; p = 0.201). The transoral approach group had no facial nerve deficit, but 5 of 29 patients (17.2%) in the external approach group had transient facial nerve paralysis (p = 0.052). The external approach group had a longer hospitalization time than the transoral approach group (5 vs. 4 days, p = 0.0017). The use of a transoral surgical approach to treat patients with deep-lobe parotid gland PAs led to low recurrence, shorter hospitalization times, and good functional and cosmetic outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".