Laparoscopic Cerclage in a Patient of Cervical Incompetence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cervical incompetence may be due to obstetric or gynecological or congenital causes. The laparoscopic cerclage is highly recommended for previous failed vaginal cerclage and is superior to laparotomy approach in terms of low morbidity and faster recovery. In this case report, we tried to evaluate obstetric outcome of preconceptional laparoscopic cerclage in a patient of cervical incompetence. A 31-year-old lady presented with primary infertility. She had two first-trimester and two second-trimester abortions. Vaginal cerclage was done in subsequent pregnancy by MacDonald’s method, which failed to prolong pregnancy. Hence, preconceptional laparoscopic cerclage was done with Mersilene tape. Main outcome was neonatal survival and prolongation of gestation. The lady successfully completed 36 weeks and delivered a baby weighing 2.94 kg, by elective LSCS without any complications. Preconceptional laparoscopic cerclage proved to be safe and effective, resulting in favorable obstetric outcome in this lady having cervical incompetence and bad obstetric history. J Clin Gynecol Obstet. 2016;5(4):129-130 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jcgo415w
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".