MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220880323 · doi:10.1097/gme.0000000000001951

Avoidable bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy at hysterectomy: a large retrospective study

2022· article· en· W4220880323 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMenopause The Journal of The North American Menopause Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalTrillium Health CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetrospective cohort studyMEDLINEClinical PracticeDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the proportion of justified bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) at hysterectomy, based on pathologic diagnosis, and determine prevalence of avoidable BSO based on pre- and intraoperative considerations and pathologic diagnosis. METHODS: Retrospective review of hysterectomies at seven Ontario, Canada hospitals from 2016 to 2019. Surgeries completed by oncologists or for invasive placentation were excluded. Patient, case, and surgeon characteristics were recorded along with pathologic diagnoses. Avoidable BSO criteria were: preoperative diagnosis of cervical dysplasia or benign diagnosis other than endometriosis, gender dysphoria, risk reduction or premenstrual dysphoric disorder; age < 51 years; absence of intraoperative endometriosis and adhesions; unjustified pathology (where "justified" pathology was endometriosis or (pre)malignant diagnosis except for cervical dysplasia). Patients with avoidable BSO were compared to those having at least one criterion for BSO. Binary logistic regression identified factors most strongly associated with avoidable BSO. RESULTS: Four thousand one hundred ninety-one hysterectomies were completed with 1,422 (33.9%) patients having concomitant BSO. Pathologic diagnosis justified BSO in most patients (1,035/1,422, 72.8%) with endometrial cancer being most common (439/1,422, 30.9%). When preoperative characteristics, intraoperative findings, and pathologic diagnoses were considered, 79 of 1,422 (5.6%) BSOs were avoidable. Compared to cases with at least one criterion for BSO, avoidable BSOs were more frequently completed by generalists (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.10-2.99, P = 0.021), for preoperative diagnoses of abnormal uterine bleeding/menorrhagia (OR 3.82, 95% CI 2.35-6.30, P = 0.001) and fibroids (OR 4.25, 95% CI 2.63-6.92, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Pathologic diagnosis justified most BSOs at hysterectomy. BSO was avoidable in 5.6% of patients, underscoring the need to standardize practice of BSO.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.264
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMenopause The Journal of The North American Menopause SocietySame topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207