MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W770756122 · doi:10.1016/j.ajur.2015.06.002

Flexible ureteroscopy: Technological advancements, current indications and outcomes in the treatment of urolithiasis

2015· review· en· W770756122 on OpenAlexaff
Husain Alenezi, John D. Denstedt

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian journal of urology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUreteroscopyUpper urinary tractLithotripsyUrinary systemSurgeryUreterInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last 3 decades have witnessed great improvements in the technology and clinical applications of many minimally invasive procedures in the urological field. Flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) has advanced considerably to become a widely utilized diagnostic and therapeutic tool for multiple upper urinary tract pathologies. The most common indication for fURS is the treatment of upper urinary tract stones with the aid of Holmium:Yttrium Aluminium Garnet (YAG) laser lithotripsy. Advancements in endoscope technologies and operative techniques have lead to a broader application of fURS in the management of urolithiasis to include larger and more complex stones. fURS has proved to be an effective and safe procedure with few contraindications. Continued progression in fURS may increase its clinical applicability and supplant other procedures as the first line treatment option for urolithiasis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations71
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian journal of urologySame topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207