Impact of ultrasound in diagnosis of hydatidiform mole in early pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aims to assess current evidence of ultrasound in diagnosis of hydatidiform mole (HM) in early pregnancy (EP). METHODS: This study will incorporate case-control study on investigating the impact of ultrasound in diagnosis of HM in EP. Potential articles will be retrieved in electronic databases of Cochrane Library, MEDLINE/PUBMED, EMBASE, PsycINFO, WANGFANG, and CNKI from inception to the present. Conference proceeding, website of clinical trial registry, and reference list of key articles will be examined for additional studies. Two independent researchers will scan and select studies, collect and manage data, and appraise methodological quality of all eligible studies. We will carry out summary effect size, statistical heterogeneity, synthesize, and analyze outcome data. RESULTS: This study will summarize present evidence to assess the accuracy of ultrasound in diagnosis of HM in EP. CONCLUSION: This study may provide evidence for ultrasound in diagnosis of HM in EP, which may benefit both patients and clinicians. STUDY REGISTRATION: INPLASY202080080.
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 | 0.035 | 0.234 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".