MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922454096 · doi:10.1155/2019/5702983

Pregnancy in a Woman with Latent Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Induced Chronic Portal Vein Thrombosis, Portal Cavernoma, and Gastric Varices

2019· article· en· W2922454096 on OpenAlexaff
Andréanne Durivage, Geneviève Le Templier, Annabelle Cumyn, Nadine Sauvé

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePortal hypertensionPortal vein thrombosisMyeloproliferative neoplasmThrombosisGastric varicesGastroenterologyPortal venous pressurePregnancyInternal medicineEtiologyChronic liver diseaseVaricesRadiologyCirrhosisMyelofibrosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extra-hepatic portal vein thrombosis (EHPVO) represents the obstruction of the portal vein outside the liver and is not related to chronic liver disease or neoplasia. In chronic EHPVO, collateral veins and portal hypertension develop, resulting in splenomegaly and variceal formation. Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are the most frequent acquired etiology of EHPVO. These conditions put pregnant women at increased risk of vascular complications, including venous thrombosis, occlusion of the placental circulation, and variceal bleeding. In this report, we present a 36-year-old pregnant woman with chronic, anticoagulated EHPVO secondary to latent MPN who developed severe intrauterine growth restriction and had cesarean section at 32+1 weeks for increased umbilical doppler resistance and breech presentation. The article will emphasize outcome and management of pregnancies complicated by chronic EHPVO, portal hypertension, and MPN.

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)0.003
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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicLiver Disease and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207