MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414965714 · doi:10.3389/fsurg.2025.1683321

Case Report: SCOUT MD™ four reflector technology—enhancing accuracy in breast lesion isolation

2025· article· en· W4414965714 on OpenAlexaff
Anna LaRussa, Sydney Caputo, Ali Sadeghi, Ralph L. Corsetti

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreast Implant and Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMerit Medical SystemsTulane University
KeywordsDissection (medical)ResectionReduction (mathematics)Breast tumorBreast reductionMastectomyOncoplastic Surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(DCIS) for surgical resection using multiple SCOUT reflectors in a 45-year-old woman with DCIS of the left breast. Lesional resection using SCOUT MD™'s four unique reflectors was completed with real-time feedback from the SCOUT probe, providing information on distance, depth, and orientation around the perimeter of the calcifications. Successful DCIS resection was confirmed by post-resection tomosynthesis imaging of the partial mastectomy specimen, and negative margins were achieved. The patient synchronously chose contralateral breast reduction to achieve symmetry with the ipsilateral oncoplastic reduction mastoplasty. Advancements in SCOUT MD™ technology provide for improved intraoperative precision in the dissection with the use of four unique reflectors, while maintaining optimal cosmetic results by minimizing the removal of normal tissue. We believe these technological advancements in breast tumor localization will reduce rates of re-excision and the need for additional surgical management.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in SurgerySame topicBreast Implant and ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207