MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790995136 · doi:10.1089/gyn.2017.0131

Laparoscopic Treatment of Tubal Torsion in Pregnancy

2018· article· en· W2790995136 on OpenAlexaff
Eliane M. Shore, Pareskevi A. Vlachou, Mark H. Yudin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gynecologic Surgery · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLaparoscopyLaparotomyPregnancySurgeryCosmesisSalpingectomyGestationOvarian cystAbdominal painLower abdominal painOvarian torsionFallopian tubeObstetricsCystEctopic pregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Isolated tubal torsion in pregnant women is a rare diagnosis often treated with laparotomy. Case: A 37-year-old woman at 25 weeks of gestation presented with severe lower abdominal pain and vomiting. Ultrasound revealed a 6-cm ovarian cyst. She was taken to the operating room for a diagnostic laparoscopy. Results: She was found to have an isolated tubal torsion. The tube was detorted and treated with a salpingectomy. Her postoperative course, the remainder of her pregnancy, and her delivery were uncomplicated. No adverse pregnancy outcomes were associated with the laparoscopic management of her isolated tubal torsion in pregnancy. Conclusions: Laparoscopic management of adnexal pathology in pregnancy should be considered in view of the benefits of laparoscopy, including decreased postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay, quicker recovery, and improved cosmesis. (J GYNECOL SURG 34:174)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gynecologic SurgerySame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207