MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220964177 · doi:10.1530/raf-21-0106

Revisiting the impact of race/ethnicity in endometriosis

2022· article· en· W4220964177 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction and Fertility · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndometriosisMedical careMEDLINEState (computer science)DiseaseHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endometriosis is a chronic, multisystemic disease often presenting with significant phenotypic variation amongst patients. The impact of race/ethnicity on the prevalence of endometriosis, as well as disease presentation, is a question of interest which has been explored for the last century. This narrative review explores the historical perspective of endometriosis and race/ethnicity as well as the evidence available to date. Furthermore, we discuss the potential implication of the bias perpetuated on this topic, specifically in the areas of medical education, research, and clinical care. In consideration of these intersecting realms, we suggest priorities for future consideration of race/ethnicity as it pertains to the delivery of care for endometriosis patients. Lay summary: The relationship between race/ethnicity and endometriosis has been explored for over a century. Historical bias and poorly conducted research have led to the idea that this condition is less likely to be diagnosed in certain racial groups, such as Black women. We review the current state of evidence and highlight important limitations within medical education and research on this topic. Finally, we advocate for a shifting viewpoint as we strive to deliver equitable and outstanding care for all endometriosis patients.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.713

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.318 · 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.

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

Citations56
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction and FertilitySame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207