MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383314424 · doi:10.1007/s44174-023-00108-6

Proof-of-Concept Study Evaluating the Performance and Physiologic Response of the FloStent Prostatic Stent in a Healthy Canine Model

2023· article· en· W4383314424 on OpenAlex
Adam Kadlec, Anand Doraiswamy, M. Ortega Bravo, Haydee Jacobs, Tim Hacker, Dean Elterman

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

VenueBiomedical Materials & Devices · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStentMedicineImplantTolerabilityAnimal modelRadiologySurgeryAdverse effectInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The purpose of this study was to evaluate the deliverability, tolerability, and retrievability of a novel prostatic stent (the FloStent System™) in a healthy canine model. This was a non-randomized, as-treated study. Implantations were performed using a novel fluoroscopic technique. Animals were followed up to 30 days. No stent migration occurred; the stent was well tolerated; retrieval procedures were successful. Gross pathology and histopathological findings were consistent with minimal trauma caused by the implant procedures. The FloStent prostatic implant was demonstrated adequate functionality and safety in this healthy animal model, which supports plans for future use in human studies.

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)0.003
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.303 · 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