MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W156704022 · doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.11.001

The diagnosis and management of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

2011· article· en· W156704022 on OpenAlexaffabout
Doron Shmorgun, Paul Claman, Mathias Gysler, Robert Hemmings, Anthony P. Cheung, Gwendolyn J. Goodrow, Edward G. Hughes, Jason Min, Jeff Roberts, Vyta Senikas, Benjamin Wong, David C. Young

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian function and disorders
Canadian institutionsAlberta Bible CollegeBurnaby HospitalCongress of Aboriginal Peoples
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvarian hyperstimulation syndromeMEDLINEMedicineIntensive care medicineHealth careControlled ovarian hyperstimulationHealth professionalsGynecologyClinical PracticeFamily medicinePregnancyIn vitro fertilisationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To review the clinical aspects of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and provide recommendations on its diagnosis and clinical management. OUTCOMES: These guidelines will assist in the early recognition and management of ovarian hyperstimulation. Early recognition and prompt systematic supportive care will help avert poor outcomes. EVIDENCE: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane database were searched for relevant articles, using the key words "ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome" and "gonadotropins," and guidelines created by other professional societies were reviewed. VALUES: The quality of evidence was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Recommendations for practice were ranked according to the method described in that report (Table 1).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations35
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecology & ObstetricsSame topicOvarian function and disordersFrench-language works237,207