Bibliographic record
Abstract
Uterine fibroids have been a major problem for women throughout the centuries manifesting themselves primarily with bladder, bowel, and pressure symptoms relating to their size; and abnormal uterine bleeding and infertility depending upon their location. They have prompted the use of a number of therapeutic approaches including hysterectomy, hysteroscopic surgery, and various laparoscopic approaches including excision, thermogenic, and cryogenic myolysis. The most recent development in the management of uterine fibroids is the use of arterial embolization. This publication addresses all of the areas in regards to fibroids in an expansive, thorough, and interesting fashion. Chapters include an overview of the incidences of fibroids, and the changing nature as far as treatment is concerned in regards to an aging population interested in fertility. Histopathology is explored, as well as attention to physiology and unicellular origin of fibroids. Diagnostic imaging, with the appearance of the CAT scan and MRI, has changed the nature of our understanding of myomas in that now penetration into the cavity and other anatomical distortions can be more precisely delineated prior to definitive surgery and/or treatment. The chapter on laparoscopic management includes discussions of all of those techniques that have required an invasive approach in order to manage the patient with symptomatic myomas. The pregnant patient with myoma represents a special challenge. These myomas may cause premature labor, and are problematic in cesarean sections.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.508 | 0.429 |
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".