Does size matter for resection of giant versus non-giant hepatocellular carcinoma? A meta-analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research on long-term survival after resection of giant (≥ 10 cm) and non-giant hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (< 10 cm) has produced conflicting results. AIM: This study aimed to investigate whether oncological outcomes and safety profiles of resection differ between giant and non-giant HCC. METHODS: non-giant HCC were included. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary endpoints were postoperative complications and mortality rates. All studies were assessed for bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: = 0.140). CONCLUSION: Resection of giant HCC is associated with poorer long-term outcomes. The safety profile of resection was similar in both groups; however, this may have been confounded by reporting bias. HCC staging systems should account for the size differences.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it