MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318620181 · doi:10.7759/cureus.34441

Robotic Ventral Transabdominal Preperitoneal Repair of Uncomplicated Spigelian Hernia

2023· article· en· W4318620181 on OpenAlexaff
Boluwatito T Abraham, Hussein Sheikhaden, Jae Wook Lee, John T Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHernia repair and management
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpigelian herniaMedicineFasciaVentral herniaSurgeryHerniaGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spigelian hernias are rare herniations through the Spigelian fascia, with an incidence rate of 0.12-2.0% of all hernias. Diagnosis may be difficult due to a potential lack of symptoms until complications arise. Therefore, imaging with either ultrasound or CT with oral contrast is recommended to confirm the diagnosis if a Spigelian hernia is suspected. Once the diagnosis has been established, it is essential that operative repair be performed as soon as possible because 24% of Spigelian hernias become incarcerated, and 27% of Spigelian hernias lead to strangulation. Management options include open surgery, laparoscopic surgery, and robotic surgery. This case report discusses the management of a 47-year-old man with an uncomplicated Spigelian hernia that was repaired with the robotic ventral transabdominal preperitoneal repair 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
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 score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicHernia repair and managementFrench-language works237,207