MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240434425 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd010931

Risk of endometrial cancer in women treated with ovary-stimulating drugs for subfertility

2014· reference-entry· en· W4240434425 on OpenAlexaff
Alkistis Skalkidou, Theodoros Ν. Sergentanis, Εvangelos Εvangelou, Θεοδώρα Ψαλτοπούλου, Marianthi Sotiraki, Marialena Trivella, Charalampos Siristatidis, Eleni Petridou

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2014
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsCochrane
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvaryMedicineEndometrial cancerGynecologyCancerStimulationObstetricsOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To evaluate the association between ovary‐stimulation drugs for the treatment of subfertility and endometrial cancer risk.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.010
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207