MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7105642832 · doi:10.48620/92372

Reconstruction of the subungual region for tumors of the thumb: Outcomes of the reverse, dorsoulnar flap.

2025· article· en· W7105642832 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access CRIS of the University of Bern · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Facial Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsHand and Upper Limb Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThumbDashRange of motionNumerical digitHand strengthVisual analogue scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background For subungual, malignant skin tumors of the thumb, ultimate treatment has mostly been the amputation, a procedure that comes with a significant functional loss. We propose reconstruction of the defect with the reverse, homodigital, dorsoulnar, pedicled (RHDU) flap, if no osseous infiltration is present.Methods We present the cosmetic and functional results in five patients treated for subungual tumors of the thumb between May 2020 and September 2023. Range of motion in the metacarpo-and interphalangeal joints, the widening angle of the first web, Kapandji score, grip and pinch strength, outcome scores including the disability of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) and Michigan Hand Score (MHQ) were assessed at final follow up.Results Range for follow up was 1-5 years. Function was comparable to the contralateral side. Patient reported outcome showed satisfactory function with an average DASH score of 12.82 and MHQ score of 84.8. The cosmetic result was rated with an average of 90 points on the visual analogue scale for cosmesis. No recurrence of the tumor has been reported in any case.Conclusion Reconstruction of the defect with a RHDU flap after excision of subungual tumors and proof of no osseous invasion, is a reliable and a promising alternative to an amputation, resulting in satisfactory functional and cosmetic outcomes.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.002
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 venueOpen Access CRIS of the University of BernSame topicReconstructive Facial Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207