MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738993267 · doi:10.1097/grf.0000000000000312

Preclinical Models of Ovarian Cancer: Pathogenesis, Problems, and Implications for Prevention

2017· review· en· W2738993267 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony N. Karnezis, Kathleen R. Cho

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Obstetrics & Gynecology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineOvarian cancerPathogenesisBioinformaticsCancerCancer preventionImmunologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preclinical models are relatively underutilized and underfunded resources for modeling the pathogenesis and prevention of ovarian cancers. Several reviews have detailed the numerous published models of ovarian cancer. In this review, we will provide an overview of experimental model systems, their strengths and limitations, and use selected models to illustrate how they can be used to address specific issues about ovarian cancer pathogenesis. We will then highlight some of the preclinical prevention studies performed to date and discuss experiments needed to address important unanswered questions about ovarian cancer 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 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)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.427
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.092 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Obstetrics & GynecologySame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207