MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346775587 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2016.00085

Deep Retraction Pockets, Endometriosis, and Quality of Life

2016· article· en· W2346775587 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P.P. Yeung, Ian Logan, Jeffrey A. Gavard

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndometriosisQuality (philosophy)Quality of life (healthcare)MedicineComputer scienceIntensive care medicineComputational biologyBiologyPathologyPhysicsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine if deep retraction pockets (DRPs) in the posterior cul-de-sac and uterosacral ligaments could be a manifestation of endometriosis and if excision of these pockets improves pain symptoms and quality of life. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study Canadian Task Force Classification, II-3. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Preoperative data, operative data, and follow-up data were collected prospectively at the Center for Endometriosis at Saint Louis University, a referral center for the surgical management of endometriosis. RESULTS: The 107 consecutive patients who presented with preoperative deep dyspareunia were included in the study, and the median postoperative follow-up was 13 months. Endometriosis was confirmed histologically in any location excised in 88/107 (82.2%) of the women, and 31 DRPs were excised from 25 women with DRPs in the posterior cul-de-sac or uterosacral ligaments, of which 15/31 (48.4%) had endometriosis. Of the 10 DRPs without visible surface lesions, 3 (30.0%) had endometriosis on histology. Pain symptoms and quality of life significantly improved after excision surgery, whether or not DRPs were present. Women who had endometriosis in their DRP also had significant improvement in deep dyspareunia and chronic pelvic pain and quality of life. Results did not differ when patients who took postoperative hormonal suppression were removed from the analyses. CONCLUSION: Patients had significantly improved pain symptoms and quality of life after excision surgery, whether or not DRPs were present. This study demonstrated that a DRP may be a manifestation of endometriosis (even with a clear surface of the pocket), so that DRPs should be excised to achieve optimal excision of endometriosis.

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: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.003
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207