Category – Early Pregnancy and Acute Gynaecology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and objectives Considerable attention has been paid to standardising randomised controlled trial methods.However, the selection, collection, and reporting of outcomes have been largely overlooked.There is currently limited consensus regarding the outcomes and outcome measures endometriosis research should select, collect, and report.The development and use of a core outcome set would help to address these issues, ensuring outcomes important to all stakeholders, including women with endometriosis, will be selected, collected, and reported in a standardised fashion.Methods An international steering group including healthcare professionals, researchers, and women with endometriosis guided the development of this core outcome set.Potential outcomes were identified through a comprehensive literature review and entered into formal consensus development methods.Key stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, researchers, and women with endometriosis, were invited to participate in robust consensus development methods including the Delphi method and nominal group technique.Results One hundred and sixteen healthcare professionals, 31 researchers, and 206 women with endometriosis representing 25 countries participated in an online Delphi survey.Seventeen consensus outcomes were identified and entered into a modified nominal group technique.Eight healthcare professionals, six researchers, and 10 women with endometriosis prioritised five core pain outcomes: overall pain, improvement in the most troublesome symptom, quality of life, adverse events, and patient satisfaction with treatment.Eight infertility core outcomes were also prioritised: viable pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound, pregnancy loss including ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, and stillbirth, live birth, gestational age at delivery, time to pregnancy leading to live birth, birthweight, neonatal mortality, and major congenital abnormalities.Conclusion Embedding the core outcome set within future endometriosis research could make a profound contribution to advancing the usefulness of research to inform clinical practice, enhance patient care, and improve outcomes.
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 | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.083 | 0.010 |
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".