MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013421331 · doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(00)01195-9

Uterine artery embolization in an undiagnosed uterine sarcoma

2001· article· en· W2013421331 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Al‐Badr

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUterine Myomas and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUterine artery embolizationUterine sarcomaUterusEmbolizationSarcomaUterine arteryMalignancyRadiologyBiopsyUterine cancerLeiomyomaGynecologyCancerPathologyInternal medicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Uterine sarcomas are rare malignancies that resemble benign uterine leiomyomata. Uterine artery embolization is offered increasingly for treatment of uterine leiomyomata, which might lead to embolization of undiagnosed uterine sarcoma. CASE: A 52-year-old woman, gravida 7, para 6, with perimenopausal menometrorrhagia was diagnosed with uterine leiomyomata after physical examination and transvaginal ultrasound. An endometrial biopsy was negative for malignancy. After medical treatment was unsuccessful, she had uterine artery embolization. She then passed a piece of tissue from her vagina, the pathology report of which was necrotic high-grade sarcoma. During surgery we confirmed that the tumor was confined to the uterus. CONCLUSION: Uterine sarcoma cannot be diagnosed except by pathologic examination of a resected specimen. Women considering uterine artery embolization for treatment of apparent leiomyomata should be counseled on the risk of decreased survival by delaying diagnosis and treatment of uterine sarcoma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations36
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicUterine Myomas and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207