MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325934293 · doi:10.1136/eb-2013-101582

Abnormal vaginal bleeding after epidural steroid injection: is there a cause for concern?

2013· letter· en· W2325934293 on OpenAlexaff
Harsha Shanthanna, Jason W. Busse

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Medicine · 2013
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy-related medical research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWeb of scienceEpidural steroid injectionInternal medicineGastroenterologyLow back painPathologyMeta-analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commentary on: Suh-Burgmann E, Hung YY, Mura J. Abnormal vaginal bleeding after epidural steroid injection: a paired observation cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013;209:206.e1–6.[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] Epidural steroid injections (ESI) are the most commonly performed intervention for chronic axial pain. In the USA alone, the number of ESIs administered to Medicare recipients almost doubled between 2000 and 2004 (from 740 845 to 1 437 962 procedures/year).1 A recent systematic review found high-quality evidence that ESI for sciatica results in small, short-term (>2 weeks but ≤3 months) improvements in pain and disability; however, neither effects remained significant at ≥12 months of follow-up.1 ESI are associated with adverse effects that may be related to the technical approach or due to the effect of the steroids themselves,2 but there is very limited … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DAm%2BJ%2BObstet%2BGynecol%26rft.volume%253D157%26rft.spage%253D865%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.7326%252F0003-4819-157-12-201212180-00564%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F23362516%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7326/0003-4819-157-12-201212180-00564&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=23362516&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmed%2F19%2F2%2Fe16.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000312583200016&link_type=ISI

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Case reportlow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Case reportlow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based MedicineSame topicPregnancy-related medical researchFrench-language works237,207