MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031409388 · doi:10.1097/ruq.0b013e31819032f

Adnexal Masses in the Pregnant Patient

2008· review· en· W2031409388 on OpenAlexaff
Phyllis Glanc, Shia Salem, Dan Farine

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound Quarterly · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNatural historyAdnexal massPregnancyAdnexal DiseasesConservative managementPsychological interventionRisk stratificationRadiologyObstetricsSurgeryLaparoscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultrasound is a valuable diagnostic tool, which can be used to stratify pregnant women with adnexal masses into a conservative management protocol versus those that require further diagnostic and management decisions. Familiarity with the natural history and sonographic features of common adnexal lesions, such as simple cysts, hemorrhagic cysts, endometriomas, mature cystic teratomas, and ovarian conditions specific to pregnancy, may permit stratification of patients into management protocols. The goal of ultrasound evaluation in the pregnant patient with an adnexal mass is to identify those patients in whom conservative management is appropriate versus those who require more immediate interventions such as surgery. The risk of surgical interventions needs to be balanced against the potential risks of nonintervention, which may include torsion, rupture, hemorrhage, or the rare spread of a malignant cancer. Atypical features or persistent large lesions should initiate a multidisciplinary team approach to optimize diagnostic and management strategy. Acute symptoms may precipitate emergency intervention at any point in the pregnancy. We will present a diagnostic and management algorithm based on clinical symptoms, timing of detection, natural history, and sonographic features of adnexal masses in pregnancy.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 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

Citations70
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound QuarterlySame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207