A FIGO/SOGC Collaboration—<i>SOGC Clinical Practice Guidelines</i> in the IJGO
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
André B. Lalonde, M.D. Executive Vice-President The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC) The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC) is pleased to provide the SOGC Clinical Practice Guidelines for publication on a regular basis in the International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics (IJGO). In this collaboration, the editor of the IJGO will select existing guidelines that have been approved by the SOGC that he believes will be of the greatest interest to the many readers of the IJGO around the world. The developmental process of the SOGC Guidelines is rigorous. A committee of experts is brought together and a relevant clinical practice committee reviews many iterations of a guideline prior to submission for approval by the Executive and Council Committee of the SOGC. The guidelines are evidence based, using the latest information and making extensive use of data bases such as the Cochrane Library. All recommendations are graded with the highest recommendation (level 1) given when evidence is supplied by randomized controlled trials. Level 3 evidence is given for clinical practice, that is, evidence recommended by a committee of experts but for which further studies are needed. The SOGC is pleased to provide these guidelines to the IJGO. They may be reproduced, printed or modified without having to seek any approval from the SOGC. We encourage member associations of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) and individuals to use these guidelines and to adapt them to their own clinical environments. The guidelines are produced to help all physicians maintain excellence in delivering clinical practice to women in Canada and abroad. The complete list as well as the text of all our guidelines are available on the SOGC website at www.sogc.org. The SOGC Guidelines are divided according to clinical practice of obstetrics and gynecology. The SOGC also produces policy statements on various issues, such as midwifery care, sexual education and many other relevant women's health issues. During the last few months, we have updated our guidelines in the areas of operative vaginal delivery and vaginal birth after cesarean section. With the increase of cesarean sections worldwide and the concerns of the public and governments about this increase, it is important that we promote evidence based guidelines that will lead to a cesarean section rate that is reasonable and medically defendable, and that addresses the need of women worldwide. The SOGC recommends that all national societies use these guidelines as a template and adapt them to the needs of their countries and/or practice groups. In a partnership project between the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Uganda, Associations des obstétriciens et gynécologues de Haiti, and the Guatemala Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, we have exchanged guidelines and these societies have adapted them to their local conditions and circumstances. The SOGC has produced guidelines for over 20 years; these guidelines are well respected and have been frequently used in medicolegal cases to protect and defend the action of physicians. We are proud that the SOGC Clinical Practice Guidelines have stood the test of time, and we hope that with regular publication in the International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, they will find an even wider audience worldwide.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,042 | 0,207 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,010 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,014 | 0,008 |
| Science ouverte | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,017 | 0,015 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,059 | 0,078 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».