Occipital condyle and its relevance during surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background : Occipital condyle (OC) is an important landmark for transcondylar approach of surgeries in case of lesions ventral to brainstem and craniovertebral junctional anomalies. To go through this approach, one should have an extensive knowledge of occipital condyle. The aim of the current study is to provide linear and angular measurements of OC. Material and methods : The study was performed in 36 dry adult skulls of unknown age and sex. Various morphological and Metric data were collected from specimen. Results : Average length, width and height of the occipital condyle were found to be 22.49mm, 11.87mm, 9.13mm. Intracranial orifices of hypoglossal canal were found to be present against the junction of 2nd and 3rd quarter or against the 3rd quarter of occipital condyle. Extracranial orifices of hypoglossal canal were found to be present against the junction of 1st and 2nd quarter or against the 2rd quarter of occipital condyle. Conclusion : There is no significant racial variation in shape and size of occipital condyle. The safest area to be drilled in occipital condyle is the 4th quarter as no important structure is located against this region. This study would help in surgeries of lesions ventral to brainstem and craniovertebral junctional anomalies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".