MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792804309 · doi:10.1097/pgp.0000000000000481

Canadian Consensus-based and Evidence-based Guidelines for Benign Endometrial Pathology Reporting in Biopsy Material

2018· article· en· W2792804309 on OpenAlexaffabout
Carlos Parra‐Herran, Matthew Cesari, Bojana Djordjevic, Katherine Grondin, Mary Kinloch, Martin Köbel, Amrah Pirzada, Anna Plotkin, C. Blake Gilks

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecological Pathology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecUniversity of CalgaryVancouver General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of SaskatchewanTrillium Health CentreSaskatoon City HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of TorontoMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineTerminologyMedicineEndometrial biopsyCritical appraisalEndometrial cancerBiopsyMedical diagnosisMEDLINEGynecologyStandardizationMedical physicsPathologyCancerInternal medicineAlternative medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Standardized terminology has proven benefits in cancer reporting; in contrast, reporting of benign diagnoses in endometrial biopsy currently lacks such standardization. Unification and update on the lexicon can provide the structure and consistency needed for optimal patient care and quality assurance purposes. The Special Interest Group in Gynecologic Pathology of the Canadian Association of Pathologists-Association Canadienne des Pathologistes (CAP-ACP) embarked in an initiative to address the current need for consensus terminology in benign endometrial biopsy pathology reporting. Nine members of the Special Interest Group developed a guideline for structured diagnosis of benign endometrial pathology through critical appraisal of the available peer-reviewed literature and joint discussions. The first version of the document was circulated for feedback to a group of professionals in akin fields, the CAP-ACP Executive Committee and the CAP-ACP general membership. The final 1-page document included 17 diagnostic terms comprising the most common benign endometrial entities, as well as explanatory notes for pathologists. The proposed terminology was implemented in the practice of 5 pathologists from the group, who applied the guideline to all benign endometrial biopsies over a 2-wk period. A total of 212 benign endometrial biopsies were evaluated in this implementation step; the recommended terminology adequately covered the diagnosis in 203 cases (95.8%). A list of terminology for benign endometrial biopsy reporting, based on expert consensus and critical appraisal of the available literature, is presented. On the basis of our results of implementation at multiple centers, the proposed guideline can successfully cover the large majority of diagnostic scenarios. The document has the potential to positively impact patient care, promote quality assurance, and facilitate research initiatives aimed at improving histopathologic assessment of benign endometrium.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecological PathologySame topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207