Simplified approach to the treatment of endometriosis--ECO system.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The aim of the present study was to develop a system to facilitate the approach for patients with endometriosis, mainly for non-specialized gynecologists. METHODS: This was a multicenter study (Canadian Task Force classification II-3). The study aimed to correlate three known parameters for endometriosis, qualifying and quantifying their importance in terms of disease severity and treatment complexity. Patients were divided into three groups. RESULTS: Each parameter was scored from 0 to 2 in order to determine medical or surgical management for endometriosis based on the clinical and imaging results, where the total score of 0 to 2 was for medical treatment, score 3 was possible medical treatment or surgical and score of 4 to 6 was for surgical intervention. A total score from the three parameters was obtained. Anatomical extent of infiltration and complaints and objective of the patient was helpful in deciding on management of patients with endometriosis. CONCLUSION: The ECO system can be a qualified and helpful tool in the approach to patients with suspected endometriosis, mainly for non-specialized gynecologists.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".