MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale.

2023· article· en· W6904739763 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurosurgical Procedures and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrainageHematomaClinical PracticeMeta-analysisSystematic errorQuantitative assessment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div><p>Background</p><p>Chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) is commonly treated via surgical removal of the hematoma, placement of a routine indwelling drainage tube, and continuous drainage to ensure that the blood does not re-aggregate following removal. However, the optimal location for placement of the drainage tube remains to be determined.</p><p>Objectives</p><p>To aid in establishing a reference for selecting the optimal method, we compared the effects of different drainage tube placements on CSDH prognosis via a systematic review and meta-analysis of previous clinical studies.</p><p>Data sources</p><p>PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases.</p><p>Study eligibility criteria</p><p>We searched for clinical studies comparing the outcomes of subperiosteal/subgaleal drainage (SPGD) and subdural drainage (SDD) for CSDH published in English prior to April 1, 2022.</p><p>Participants</p><p>The final analysis included 15 studies involving 4,318 patients.</p><p>Results</p><p>Our analysis of the pooled results revealed no significant differences in recurrence rate between the SDD and SPGD groups. We also observed no significant differences in mortality or rates of postoperative complications (infection, pneumocephalus, or epilepsy) between the SDD and SPGD groups.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>These results suggest that the choice of SDD vs. SPGD has no significant effect on CSDH prognosis, highlighting SPGD as an alternative treatment option for CSDH.</p></div>

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0940.008

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.229 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicNeurosurgical Procedures and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207