Endoscopic Pituitary Surgery in High‐Resource Settings Versus a Public Hospital in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The evidence supporting endoscopic transsphenoidal pituitary adenoma resection (TSPR) is predominantly from skull base centers in high-resource settings (HRSs). This study is the first comparative analysis of TSPR performed at a low-resource setting (LRS), Korle Bu Teaching Hospital (KBTH), a public hospital in Accra, Ghana, versus HRS. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary skull base surgery centers in Ghana, the United States, Canada, and Australia. METHODS: Patients who underwent TSPR at KBTH from 2021 to 2023 were compared to a multi-institutional cohort of TSPR patients from skull base centers in the United States, Canada, and Australia. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed controlling for available demographic characteristics and medical history. RESULTS: The KBTH cohort included 93 patients, and the HRS cohort included 1112 patients of similar age. The HRS cohort had higher incidences of diabetes (P = .013) and cancer history (P = .012). There were two deaths in the KBTH cohort (one intracranial bleed, one meningitis) versus five in the HRS cohort (odds ratio [OR] = 8.07, 95% CI 1.28, 50.98). There were no differences in rates of other postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate the capacity of LRSs to perform endoscopic pituitary surgery and highlight the need for building rhinologic and skull base surgery capacity around the world. This study was unable to control for important factors including tumor size, postoperative access to health care resources, availability of adjuvant treatments such as neuro-interventional radiology and stereotactic radiation therapy, and others.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".