Laparoscopic Fertility-Promoting Procedures of the fallopian tube and the uterus.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assisted reproductive technology and reproductive surgery can be complementary, and the feasibility of laparoscopic suturing has facilitated conducting reproductive surgery entirely by laparoscopy. Young women with tubal disease can be offered surgery, whereas older women, with their rapid decline in fertility, are better treated with in vitro fertilization (IVF). IVF should be the first line of treatment for women with a severe degree of hydrosalpinx, or with extensive and dense adhesions. However, the presence of hydrosalpinx decreases IVF pregnancy rates. In those whose hydrosalpinx is seen on ultrasound, especially after failed IVF cycles, a laparoscopic salpingectomy can be done. For tubal anastomosis, the superior results of this procedure are well established. The association between uterine myoma and infertility is unclear. However, in those with a distorted uterine cavity, and no other cause of infertility, myomectomy can be considered; myomectomy can be done by laparoscopy. Because of the risks of uterine rupture, proper closure of the uterine incision is of utmost importance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".