MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076490884 · doi:10.1097/pas.0b013e318093e3e2

Misoprostol Associated Refractile Material in Fetal and Placental Tissues After Medical Termination of Pregnancy

2007· article· en· W2076490884 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Ho, Sarah Keating, John Kingdom, Patrick Shannon

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMisoprostolGestationObstetricsMedicineProducts of conceptionPregnancyFetusAmniotic fluidGynecologyBiologyAbortion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Misoprostol is a synthetic prostaglandin analog administered vaginally to induce labor for intrauterine death or termination of pregnancy for congenital abnormalities. We encountered a case of misoprostol induction of labor at 14 weeks of gestation for fetal acrania associated with amniotic bands. Histology demonstrated abundant deposits of refractile material appearing to be of vegetable fiber origin on the maternal surface of the fetal membranes. Misoprostol tablet scrapings had a similar microscopic appearance. Ten additional placentas from cases of misoprostol induction of labor between 16 and 18 weeks of gestation were examined and half were found to contain such deposits. No deposits were seen in cases between 15 and 18 weeks of gestation where misoprostol was not used. We attribute the refractile material to a nonmedicinal ingredient, microcrystalline cellulose, in the misoprostol tablet preparation. This study demonstrates that vaginal administration of misoprostol tablets can be detected microscopically in at least half of cases and may have a florid appearance simulating a potential causative factor of fetal malformation. Despite the large amounts of microcrystalline cellulose and its apparent embedding in placental tissue, the misoprostol in our index case was unlikely to have caused the amniotic bands and the resulting cranial abnormality.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.275 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Surgical PathologySame topicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesFrench-language works237,207