Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cancer affecting children and individuals of reproductive age is associated with dilemmas concerning the ability to have a child and whether this child will be healthy. This is particularly true in light of the recent advances in the early detection of cancer and its effective treatment, which has improved survival rates. Both the cancer itself and its treatment have tremendous adverse effects on human reproduction and may result in the complete termination of reproductive ability both in men and women. Even in situations when conception is successfully achieved following cancer diagnosis and treatment, there are concerns regarding the potential increased risk of adverse obstetric and perinatal outcomes. This is especially true when pregnancy occurs shortly after cancer treatment. Moreover, there is a potential risk of chromosomal abnormalities and malformations in the offspring due to possible genetic defects in the germ cells induced by chemotherapy and radiotherapy. In addition, there is (at least theoretically) an increased risk of cancer developing in the offspring, particularly with hereditary cancer syndromes. A multidisciplinary team aware of the possible consequences of cancer treatment on reproduction is very much needed to provide optimal care for these patients after proper counseling regarding the potential adverse effects of cancer treatment on reproduction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".