MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383875404 · doi:10.3389/fonc.2023.1236341

Editorial: Advances in surgical approaches for the treatment of glioma

2023· editorial· en· W4383875404 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hongmin Bai, Che Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Oncology · 2023
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGliomaMedicineMedical physicsCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in surgical approaches for the treatment of glioma Presently, maximal-safe resection is still the primary pursuit for surgically treating glioma.Accordingly, there are a variety of novel techniques being developed.Therefore, this Research Topic aimed to summarize advances in glioma surgery along with emerging auxiliary techniques.On the whole, there are four aspects to consider: balancing between the extent of resection and preserving neurological function, shortening intraoperative examination time while improving the accuracy of detection, minimizing surgical incision while achieving total resection, and utilizing in vivo histological testing just before completion of resection while guaranteeing patient safety. Clinical studiesIntraoperative direct electrical stimulation (DES) can directly identify neural networks crucial for brain function and remains the gold standard for eloquent cortex localization (1, 2).Although there remains some debate (3, 4), awake brain mapping plus DES is generally associated with more extensive resection, better overall survival, and fewer severe persistent neurological deficits compared with resection under general anesthesia (5-8).Wang et al. presented their experience in awake craniotomy with intraoperative DES mapping for gliomas invading eloquent areas. With a similar surgical strategy, Yao et al. reviewed their single-center experience of treating diffuse lower grade glioma (DLGG) in the central lobe (including precentral and postcentral gyri and paracentral lobule). Both studies reported favorable results. Moreover, Wang et al. established a high sensitivity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a relatively brief screening tool for assessment of this population's cognitive impairment.Compared with awake surgery, surgery under general anesthesia is less time-consuming, with lower intraoperative risk (9, 10).Cui et al. reported their experience of removing glioma under general anesthesia assisted by intraoperative multimodal techniques (combined use of neuronavigation, iMRI, with/without DES/neuromonitoring).The large sample size (nearly 500 patients) was the strength of this study.The researchers confirmed that the application of Frontiers in Oncology frontiersin.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0090.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.018

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207