MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2567128954 · doi:10.1155/2016/3287381

Fast-Growing Meningioma in a Woman Undergoing Fertility Treatments

2016· article· en· W2567128954 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Patterson, Abdurrahim Elashaal

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Neurological Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsWindsor Regional HospitalUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFertilityMedicineMeningiomaMagnetic resonance imagingSurgeryRadiologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Meningiomas have long been known to be associated with sexual hormones. We discuss here the case of a woman with a huge meningioma that rapidly grew over the course of a couple years while the patient was simultaneously taking fertility treatments. There is substantial evidence suggesting that fertility treatments can fuel the growth of meningiomas. The potential risks should be considered in women with a previous or family history of meningiomas who plan to undergo fertility treatment. These patients need to be evaluated and a screening imaging of brain MRI (Magnetic Resonant Imaging) should be offered in the middle or toward the end of such a treatment to control and prevent complications of these meningiomas.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in Neurological MedicineSame topicMeningioma and schwannoma managementFrench-language works237,207