MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964835378 · doi:10.1177/8756479307307266

Frequency of Uterine Malformations Among Women in a Restricted Gene Pool Community

2007· article· en· W1964835378 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Saad Ramzi Ismail

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of diagnostic medical sonography · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGynecological conditions and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsPopulationHysteroscopyRetrospective cohort studyGynecologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This random, retrospective cross-sectional study was performed to determine the frequency of uterine malformation in restricted gene pool communities. During 2003—2006, 800 women from the community of LaCrete in northern Alberta, Canada (known restricted gene pool for over 500 years), participated. Of the participants, 156 (19.5% of the study population) showed some form of structural uterine malformation. This is 5.5 times higher than what is reported in the general population. All 156 subjects were further investigated with magnetic resonance imaging, 3D sonography, hysterosalpingiography, hysteroscopy, and laparoscopy. These tests revealed that 30 of these women had no previous pregnancies or live births, 40 had one or more previous pregnancies and live births and more than two miscarriages, and 55 had recurrent miscarriages. This study has provided new insights into the increasing number of uterine malformations in the LaCrete population. The significantly higher prevalence of uterine malformations in a restricted gene pool community compared to the reported prevalence in the general population might indicate a direct link between a lack of genetic diversity and the development of uterine malformations in women.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of diagnostic medical sonographySame topicGynecological conditions and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207