Endometriosis-associated infertility: a decade's trend study of women from the Estrie Region of Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endometriosis (ENDO) has been believed to increase during the last years, but recent data supporting this trend are lacking. The aim of this study was to verify whether the incidence of ENDO, infertility (INF) and the both increased during the last 10 years among women living in the Estrie region of Quebec. This retrospective cross-sectional study was realised using data from the CIRESS (Centre Informatisé de Recherche Evaluative en Services et Soins de Santé) system, the database of the CHUS (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke), Sherbrooke, Canada. Among the 6845 studied patients, 2564 had ENDO, 4537 were infertile and 256 suffered from both. According to the last 10 years, a significant increase in the number of cases with ENDO (r2 = 0.717, p = 0.001) and endometriosis-associated infertility (r2 = 0.601, p = 0.003) was noted, while INF remained stable (r2 = 2813 e-005, p = 0.987). We showed a prevalence of ENDO of 10.91%. Women with ENDO were at increased risk for being infertile (OR = 2.30; 95% CI = 2.014-2.626, p <0.0001). An increase of ENDO in women 18-24 years of age has been shown (r2 = 0.418, p = 0.023), suggesting an earlier onset of the disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".