MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1536926543 · doi:10.1111/jog.12527

Dienogest for the treatment of deep endometriosis: Case report and literature review

2014· review· en· W1536926543 on OpenAlexaff
Sugandha Agarwal, M.A. Fraser, Innie Chen, Sukhbir S. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDienogestDysuriaEndometriosisNodule (geology)Pelvic painAsymptomaticAdnexal massUrologySurgeryRadiologyGynecologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 38-year-old woman was found to have a deep 3.3-cm endometriotic nodule of the bladder, confirmed by cystoscopic resection and imaging. Ultrasound also confirmed a 2.6-cm vaginal fornix implant with similar appearance to the bladder mass. The patient's primary symptoms were mild dysmenorrhea, catamenial dysuria and hematuria. The patient conceived shortly after referral and 3 months post-delivery was offered surgical management but declined in favor of medical management. Dienogest 2 mg once a day was started and after 16 months of treatment, more than 50% reduction in the size of the bladder nodule was seen (pretreatment: 3.3 × 3.0 × 2.7 cm, volume: 13.9 cm(3) ; post-treatment: 2.8 × 2.3 × 1.0 cm, volume: 6.4 cm(3) ). The vaginal mass also decreased in size from a pretreatment value of 2.0 × 2.6 × 1.4 cm (3.8 cm(3) ) to 1.1 × 1.4 × 0.5 mm (0.40 cm(3) ) after the treatment. The patient remained asymptomatic with no significant adverse drug reaction during management. Dienogest may be one of the options for medical management of deep endometriosis in young women especially when surgical intervention is declined.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.100
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.100
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.339 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations24
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology researchSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207