MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000052343 · doi:10.1586/eog.12.21

Understanding urinalysis: clues for the obstetrician–gynecologist

2012· article· en· W2000052343 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Coad, Boris Friedman, Roxana Geoffrion

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Obstetrics & Gynecology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Urology and Nephrology Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrinalysisMedicineObstetrics and gynaecologyDiseaseIntensive care medicineObstetricsPregnancyGynecologyPathologyUrinary systemInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The observation of urine has been used for centuries to diagnose and follow many disease states. It continues to be an important test in modern medicine. Various diseases such as pelvic and bladder malignancies, liver dysfunction, renal disease, infection and some pregnancy-related pathologies such as placenta percreta and preeclampsia may be suspected on the basis of an abnormal urinalysis result. The obstetrician–gynecologist must have a good understanding of urinalysis, as correct interpretation is important for optimal patient care. In this review, we will detail the components of basic urinalysis routine and microscopy. We will discuss both basic science and clinical correlations, with a focus on diseases commonly encountered by the obstetrician–gynecologist.

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)0.030
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Obstetrics & GynecologySame topicPediatric Urology and Nephrology StudiesFrench-language works237,207