MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415121087 · doi:10.1097/iop.0000000000003090

Intersurgeon Variability in Proptosis Reduction After Orbital Decompression for Thyroid Eye Disease: A Multicenter Analysis

2025· article· en· W4415121087 on OpenAlexaff
Ashley Hong, Marissa K. Shoji, George A. Villatoro, Bharanidharan Radha-Saseendrakumar, Sally L. Baxter, Peter J. Dolman, Michael Kazim, Andrew R. Harrison, Mark J. Lucarelli, James A. Garrity, Dinesh Selva, Lilangi S. Ediriwickrema, Catherine Y. Liu, Bobby S. Korn, Don O. Kikkawa

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticenter studyThyroidReduction (mathematics)DecompressionEye diseaseGraves' ophthalmopathy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This study assesses intersurgeon variability in proptosis reduction after orbital decompression for thyroid eye disease. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study included patients with thyroid eye disease who underwent orbital decompression from 1 of 7 surgeons at 7 different institutions between January 2002 and December 2018. Data were included if a single decompression technique was performed on ≥10 patients by ≥2 surgeons. The primary outcome was postoperative change in proptosis with emphasis on comparison among surgeons utilizing similar surgical techniques. Statistical analysis was performed with χ 2 and ANOVA testing, and a multivariable logistic regression model was generated. RESULTS: Six hundred thirty-three orbits that underwent orbital decompression were included. Five different decompression techniques were analyzed: medial wall (n = 29), fat + lateral wall (n = 113), medial wall + floor (n = 123), fat + lateral wall + medial wall (n = 140), and fat + lateral wall + medial wall + floor (n = 228), without significant difference in proptosis reduction among surgeons. Surgeons did not demonstrate significant differences in outcomes at different time points compared with each other or themselves. Outcomes when comparing endoscopic versus open medial wall decompression varied among surgery types. Multivariate modeling revealed a statistically significant association between postoperative change in proptosis with preoperative proptosis ( p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative change in proptosis did not differ significantly between surgeons utilizing similar orbital decompression techniques for patients with thyroid eye disease. This study may strengthen the statistical validity of multicenter clinical trials assessing orbital decompression outcomes performed by surgeons employing uniform surgical techniques, thereby advancing our understanding of optimal surgical management strategies for thyroid eye disease.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 venueOphthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive SurgerySame topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207