MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131918048 · doi:10.7863/jum.2005.24.9.1181

The Sonographic and Color Doppler Features of Retained Products of Conception

2005· article· en· W2131918048 on OpenAlexaff
Sara M. Durfee, Mary C. Frates, Angela A. Luong, Carol B. Benson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and fetal healthcare
Canadian institutionsToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColor dopplerEndometriumGestational agePelvic painPregnancyRadiologyObstetricsGynecologyUltrasonography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify the sonographic features of retained products of conception (RPOCs). METHODS: Cases of clinically suspected RPOCs referred for pelvic sonography between September 1994 and July 2001 were identified. Patient age, indication, gestational age at delivery, and days postpartum were recorded and sonographic findings were reviewed. Outcomes were determined from medical records and pathology reports. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-three cases were identified. Indications for pelvic sonography included vaginal bleeding in 82 (50%), pelvic pain in 77 (47%), and fever in 55 (34%). Gestational age at delivery ranged from 14 to 43 weeks (mean, 37 weeks), and the sonographic examination was performed from 0 to 95 days postpartum (mean, 21 days). Thirty-six patients underwent surgical intervention, and 28 of these had RPOCs. The remaining 127 patients were followed clinically. An endometrial mass was the most sensitive (79%) and specific (89%) sonographic feature for RPOCs. The isolated finding of either complex fluid in the endometrial canal or a thick endometrium measuring greater than 10 mm had low sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive values. None of the patients with RPOCs had normal sonographic findings. The absence of an endometrial mass or complex fluid and an endometrial thickness of less than 10 mm were considered normal findings. Color Doppler flow was detected in the endometrium somewhat more often when RPOCs were present than in the absence of RPOCs (75% versus 40%). CONCLUSIONS: An endometrial mass is the most sensitive finding for RPOCs. If no mass or endometrial fluid is seen and the endometrial thickness is less than 10 mm, RPOCs are extremely unlikely. The absence of blood flow does not exclude the diagnosis of RPOCs.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 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

Citations132
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Ultrasound in MedicineSame topicMaternal and fetal healthcareFrench-language works237,207