MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967613786 · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.15863

Human uterine transplantation: a review of outcomes from the first 45 cases

2019· review· en· W2967613786 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan and Tissue Transplantation Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInfertilityTransplantationComplicationGynecologyFemale infertilityObstetricsGestationQuarter (Canadian coin)Risk factorSurgeryPregnancyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uterine transplantation restores reproductive anatomy in women with absolute uterine factor infertility and allows the opportunity to conceive, experience gestation, and acquire motherhood. The number of cases being performed is increasing exponentially, with detailed outcomes from 45 cases, including nine live births, now available. In light of the data presented herein, including detailed surgical, immunosuppressive and obstetric outcomes, the feasibility of uterine transplantation is now difficult to refute. However, it is associated with significant risk with more than one-quarter of grafts removed because of complications, and one in ten donors suffering complications requiring surgical repair. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Uterine transplantation is feasible in women with uterine factor infertility, but is associated with significant risk of complication.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.314 · 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