MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224289422 · doi:10.1016/j.sopen.2022.04.002

Head and neck hemorrhage: Technical tools and tricks

2022· article· en· W4224289422 on OpenAlex
W. Robert Leeper

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgery Open Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern UniversityVictoria Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHead and neckMedicineBloodySurgeryHead traumaGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the present work is to provide a fresh, simple, and accessible document for all surgeons who treat traumatic hemorrhage from the head and neck. This article arose from the work of a consortium of experienced trauma surgeons who collaborated to produce a first-of-its-kind surgical course for multifocal hemorrhage control. The "Bloody Simple Hemorrhage control masterclass course" has been offered at national and international venues since 2019 and has been both well received by participants and well regarded in academic trauma surgical circles. This paper—and the series of articles which accompany it—was meant to be a literature companion to or extension of the Bloody Simple course, a way to distill and digest the hemorrhage control strategies espoused therein but in the form of a journal article. The result of this work is a succinct and experience-based set of principles for conquering life-threatening, traumatic bleeding from a variety of sources in the head and neck. This article translates experience and evidence into a simple and digestible format that will provide a sound approach for any surgeon facing traumatic hemorrhage from the head and neck.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.283 · 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