MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087063684 · doi:10.1016/j.gore.2020.100646

Persistent complete hydatidiform molar pregnancy following assisted reproductive technology in a gestational carrier: Case report

2020· article· en· W3087063684 on OpenAlexaff
Oleksandra Dzyubak, Jamie Lee Fritz, Taryn Taylor, Jacob McGee

Bibliographic record

VenueGynecologic Oncology Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Trophoblastic Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMolar pregnancyMedicinePregnancyGestational trophoblastic diseaseObstetricsPartial Hydatidiform MoleIn vitro fertilisationMolarEmbryo transferGynecologyAssisted reproductive technologyGestationFetusInfertilityPlacentaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A hydatidiform mole is a rare pathology associated with pregnancy, attributed to abnormal gametogenesis and fertilization. When assisted reproduction techniques (ART) are used, the incidence of molar pregnancy is significantly lower however not eliminated. We report a case of a patient serving as a gestational carrier who developed a complete molar pregnancy, with features indicating persistent trophoblastic disease. This 33-year-old G4T3P0A1L3 woman presented with bleeding at 8 weeks gestational age, after in vitro fertilization and frozen embryo transfer. Ultrasound findings and beta-HCG levels were consistent with molar pregnancy. Pathology specimen from D&C confirmed a complete hydatidiform mole. Despite surgical treatment, beta-HCG remained elevated and multiple pulmonary nodules and enlarged lymph nodes were noted on imaging. Methotrexate was considered but was deemed unnecessary because beta-HCG levels returned to normal over time and nodules resolved. Because molar pregnancy carries a risk of malignant transformation, albeit low, individuals undergoing ART should be counselled.

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 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)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGynecologic Oncology ReportsSame topicGestational Trophoblastic Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207