Endometriosis diagnosis, staging and typology and adverse pregnancy outcome history
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women with endometriosis may have an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Research has focused on infertility clinic populations limiting generalisability. Few studies report differences by endometriosis severity. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the relationships between endometriosis diagnosis, staging and typology and pregnancy outcomes among an operative and population-based sample of women. METHODS: Menstruating women ages 18-44 years enrolled in the ENDO Study (2007-2009), including the operative cohort: 316 gravid women undergoing laparoscopy/laparotomy at surgical centres in Utah and California; and the population cohort: 76 gravid women from the surgical centres' geographic catchment areas. Pregnancy outcomes were ascertained by questionnaire and included all pregnancies prior to study enrolment. Endometriosis was diagnosed via surgical visualisation in the operative cohort and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging in the population cohort. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using generalised linear mixed models for pregnancy outcomes, adjusting for women's age at study enrolment and at pregnancy, surgical site, body mass index and lifestyle factors. RESULTS: Women in the operative cohort with visualised endometriosis (n = 109, 34%) had a lower prevalence of live births, aPR 0.94 (95% CI 0.85, 1.03) and a higher prevalence of miscarriages, aPR 1.48 (95% CI 1.23, 1.77) compared with women without endometriosis. The direction and magnitude of estimates were similar in the population cohort. Women with deep endometriosis were 2.98-fold more likely (95% CI 1.12, 7.95) to report a miscarriage compared with women without endometriosis after adjusting for women's age at study enrolment and at pregnancy, surgical site and body mass index. No differences were seen between endometriosis staging and pregnancy outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: While there was no difference in number of pregnancies among women with and without endometriosis in a population-based sample, pregnancy loss was more common among women with endometriosis, notably among those with deep endometriosis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".