MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411017872 · doi:10.1016/j.bjorl.2025.101644

The practice of oral feeding after total laryngectomy by Brazilian head and neck surgeons

2025· article· en· W4411017872 on OpenAlex

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

VenueBrazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDysphagia Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaryngectomyMedicineHead and neckGeneral surgeryHead (geology)SurgeryLarynxBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the initiation of oral feeding in patients following TL by a group of Brazilian head and neck surgeons. METHODS: Online survey - 75 responders from Brazil. RESULTS: 40.5% of the respondents introduced water and 41.9% of them introduced liquid diets between days 7 and 9 after TL without surgical complications or previous radiotherapy. Semi-solid feeds were started between days 10 and 14 in 47.3% of the patients and a free diet was begun after day 15 in 79.7% of them. There was statistically significant difference in the initiation of liquid feeds between different groups of TL patients, with earlier initiation in TL patients who had not undergone prior radio(chemo)therapy (p = 0.01419), with even greater differences when complex closure of the pharynx was needed (p = 0.00001), but not regarding the moment of a free diet introduction. CONCLUSION: Most respondents in this Brazilian cohort prefer to wait at least 7-days before beginning oral feeding after TL without previous radiotherapy or surgical complications, with a significant number of respondents postponing feeds in patients who had undergone salvage TL and pharyngolaryngectomy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.687

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.347 · 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