MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1882737284 · doi:10.1111/his.12784

Ovarian hilar proliferations resembling Sertoli cell tumours: microscopic neoplasms or non‐neoplastic remnants?

2015· article· en· W1882737284 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer L. Taylor, Blaise Clarke, Noori U Hasan, Gorana Gašljević, Matthew Cesari, W. Glenn McCluggage

Bibliographic record

VenueHistopathology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSertoli cellPathologyDifferential diagnosisBiologyImmunohistochemistryMedicineSpermatogenesisEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To describe four cases of incidentally detected microscopic ovarian hilar Sertoli cell proliferation, a phenomenon that, as far as we are aware, has not been previously reported, and to discuss the differential diagnosis of these lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: The proliferations occurred in women aged 35-62 years, and were composed of solid and hollow tubules that were morphologically and immunohistochemically in keeping with Sertoli cells. Two cases were bilateral. CONCLUSIONS: We feel that these uncommon proliferations are likely to represent non-neoplastic embryological remnants rather than hilar Sertoli cell tumours.

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)0.000
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 score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.876

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistopathologySame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207