MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2565705187 · doi:10.1055/s-0036-1597308

Medical Management of Endometriosis in Patients with Chronic Pelvic Pain

2016· review· en· W2565705187 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Reproductive Medicine · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndometriosisPelvic painMedicineProgestinInfertilityAromataseEstrogenHormoneGynecologyInternal medicineBioinformaticsPregnancySurgeryBreast cancerCancerBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endometriosis is a common cause of pelvic pain in women of reproductive age. Traditional medical therapies are hormonal in nature, including estrogen-progestin contraceptives, progestins, and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists. Other hormonal options are androgens and aromatase inhibitors, with research also suggesting a possible role for GnRH antagonists and selective progesterone receptor modulators. Other than nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories, further work is required for nonhormonal therapies such as antiangiogenic and immune-modulating drugs. Medical treatment of endometriosis can be complex, and requires consideration of side effects, the anatomic type of endometriosis, role of surgery, current infertility or future fertility desires, and other contributors to pain (e.g., central sensitization). These factors should be discussed for each patient, to ensure personalized treatment and optimal outcomes.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.327 · 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