MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890802023 · doi:10.1159/000493128

Breast Cancer in Pregnancy: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2018· article· en· W2890802023 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGynecologic and Obstetric Investigation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyRetrospective cohort studyObstetricsBreast cancerGynecologyMalignancyCancerCohortGestationCohort studySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gestational breast cancer (GBC) is the second most commonly occurring malignancy affecting pregnant women. Management is complex due to potential foetal risks in the setting of maternal treatment. We report on the maternal, foetal, short-term neonatal and placental histopathologic findings of a retrospective cohort of pregnant women with either pre-gestational (group 1) or GBC (group 2) from a tertiary-level maternity care centre. Of the 69 women identified over 12 years, there were 47 in group 1 and 22 in group 2. Demographics, stage of breast cancer at diagnosis were similar in the 2 groups. Women with GBC (group 2) were more likely to receive surgery and chemotherapy or surgery alone as compared to those in group 1. No women with GBC received radiation during pregnancy, but 2 received this treatment postpartum. With regard to pregnancy outcomes, induction of labour was more common in women with GBC, as was preterm birth. Most preterm birth in women with GBC was late preterm, iatrogenic in nature to facilitate postpartum treatment. We conclude comparable pregnancy outcomes for women with GBC as compared to those with pregestational breast cancer.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.258 · 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