The Association Between Endometriosis and Surface Epithelial Ovarian Tumors: A Review of Pathological Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Endometriosis is a prevalent benign condition arising from female reproductive system and affects about 7% to 10% of females. The association of this disorder with epithelial ovarian tumors has been a matter of interest in gynecology. Objectives: The present study was conducted to assess the association between endometriosis and different types of surface epithelial ovarian tumor. Methods: Microscopic slides of 182 cases with the diagnosis of surface epithelial ovarian carcinoma and borderline tumor from 2007 to 2014 were reviewed for the presence of endometriosis in a tertiary gynecological center. Additional data included age, tumor size and laterality, site of endometriosis, presence of atypical endometriosis, and concomitant uterine endometrial carcinoma. Results: Endometriosis was found in 32 out of the 182 (17.58%) of reviewed ovarian epithelial tumor cases. They included endometrioid carcinoma (46.87%), clear cell carcinoma (18.75%), borderline epithelial tumor (31.25%), and low-grade serous papillary carcinoma (3.12%). Conclusions: Endometrioid and clear cell types of ovarian tumors were most frequently associated with endometriosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".