MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W79760959

A novel tool for the objective measurement of neck fibrosis: validation in clinical practice.

2012· article· en· W79760959 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher J. Chin, Jason Franklin, Benjamin Turner, Roger V. Moukarbel, Shamir Chandarana, Kevin Fung, John Yoo, Philip C. Doyle

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStiffnessSignificant differenceElasticity (physics)Head and neckSurgeryInternal medicineStructural engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is commonly used to treat neoplasms of the head and neck, and fibrosis is a known side effect. The Cutometer is a device that quantifies properties of the skin. The goal of the study was to validate the Cutometer in normal neck tissues and then quantify fibrosis in radiated necks. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 251 patients. The elasticity and stiffness parameters were recorded. Control patients were compared to determine the correlation between their left and right sides. Next, the treatment groups were compared using a nonparametric test (Kruskal-Wallis). RESULTS: We found a significant correlation between the left and right sides of the control patients' necks, supporting the view that the Cutometer provides reproducible measurements in the normal neck. Furthermore, the Cutometer demonstrated reduced elasticity in necks treated with radiation, surgery-radiation, and chemoradiation. No significant difference in stiffness was seen. CONCLUSION: The Cutometer may serve as a valuable and valid tool for the measurement of neck skin elasticity. Radiated patients have a quantifiable decrease in their skin elasticity.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207