MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041741281 · doi:10.2741/1968

Perinatal invasive malignant diseases: a review of twenty-five cases in South China

2006· review· en· W2041741281 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yan‐hong Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in bioscience · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyFetal distressObstetricsDiseaseMalignant diseasePediatricsMedical recordFetusAdvanced maternal ageCancerSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malignant neoplastic diseases (MND) are unusual complications during perinatal period and compose a dilemma for both patients and the health practitioners. Little is known about the information in Chinese suffering perinatal MND. Analyzing medical records and questionnaire, information on a series of 25 patients with a diagnosis of perinatal MND was collected from 3 medical centers between 1992 and 2004. Among all the 25 patients, 10 selected termination of the pregnancies and the other 15 continued their pregnancies until labor voluntarily, both groups obtain anti-malignancies therapies during the perinatal period. The two groups were not statistically different for the age of pregnancy, gravid and parity number, interval weeks between symptoms emergence and diagnosis of invasive malignant disease, as well as the occurrence rates of major side effects induced by malignant therapies. No statistical differences in overall survival and disease-free survival between the two groups, including the age of pregnancy, gravid and parity number, obstetric bleeding rates, neonatal distress rates, neonatal weight and puerperal morbidity rates. The patients' neonates all show no serious complications. In conclusion, pregnancy may not affect the course of MND, and termination of pregnancy may not benefit the maternal-fetal conditions, in a macroscopical point of view.

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)0.001
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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.295 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in bioscienceSame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207