Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les amenorrhees constituent un des principaux motifs de consultation en medecine de la reproduction. Elles sont definies par l’absence de cycle menstruel chez la fille apres l’âge de 16 ans avec ou sans developpement pubertaire – amenorrhee primaire – ou par son interruption chez une femme prealablement reglee – amenorrhee secondaire. La distinction classique entre amenorrhee primaire et amenorrhee secondaire est artificielle puisque leurs etiologies se recouvrent. Elle souligne simplement que la premiere releve essentiellement de causes chromosomiques et genetiques. L’absence de regles est physiologique pendant la grossesse, la lactation et la menopause. En revanche, toute interruption du cycle menstruel, au-dela d’un mois, apres arret d’une contraception orale est anormale et justifie une enquete etiologique. En pathologie, l’existence d’une amenorrhee temoigne d’une atteinte de l’axe hypothalamo-hypophyso-ovarien ou d’une anomalie anatomique du tractus reproducteur. Un traitement oestroprogestatif sans bilan prealable n’est donc jamais fonde. C’est apres la recherche d’une cause que sera propose un traitement etiologique ou, a defaut, une substitution de l’insuffisance hormonale. L’amenorrhee peut etre precedee d’irregularites menstruelles dont la valeur semiologique est similaire. Les amenorrhees, tres frequentes, obligent a passer en revue les grands chapitres de l’endocrinologie de la reproduction. Leur diagnostic etiologique peut paraitre complexe car la liste de leurs causes est longue. Sur le plan pratique, un nombre restreint d’entre elles doit imperativement etre recherche pour ne pas les meconnaitre avant de debuter un traitement oestroprogestatif.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.984 | 0.988 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".