Combined oral contraceptive use before the first birth and epithelial ovarian cancer risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Combined oral contraceptive (COC) use reduces epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) risk. However, little is known about risk with COC use before the first full-term pregnancy (FFTP). METHODS: This Canadian population-based case-control study (2001-2012) included 854 invasive cases/2139 controls aged ⩾40 years who were parous and had information on COC use. We estimated odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusted for study site, age, parity, breastfeeding, age at FFTP, familial breast/ovarian cancer, tubal ligation, and body mass. RESULTS: Among parous women, per year of COC use exclusively before the FFTP was associated with a 9% risk reduction (95% CI=0.86-0.96). Results were similar for high-grade serous and endometrioid/clear cell EOC. In contrast, per year of use exclusively after the FFTP was not associated with risk (aOR=0.98, 95% CI=0.95-1.02). CONCLUSIONS: Combined oral contraceptive use before the FFTP may provide a risk reduction that remains for many years, informing possible prevention strategies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".