MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300689304

Laparoscopic ovariectomy in 2 queens with uterine unicornis.

2022· article· en· W4300689304 on OpenAlexaff
Deanna M Puchalski, Adam T. Ogilvie

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Medicine and Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUterine hornsGynecologyLaparoscopyOvarySurgeryUterusInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two unrelated queens were presented for persistent signs of estrus despite a history of ovariohysterectomy. Uterine unicornis was suspected based on historical surgical findings. Anti-Müllerian hormone testing was consistent with the presence of ovarian tissue in both queens. Based on the ultrasonographic confirmation of unilateral abnormal structures in the ovarian region and ipsilateral absence of the kidney, a laparoscopic surgical approach was performed on each queen to remove remnant ovarian tissue. Laparoscopy confirmed the absence of a kidney ipsilateral to the remnant ovarian tissue. Both cats recovered from surgery and displayed no further signs of estrus. Key clinical message: To our knowledge, these are the first reported cases of feline uterine unicornis treated with a laparoscopic surgical approach. This minimally invasive approach, preceded by a thorough diagnostic work-up, may be of benefit to future queens with uterine unicornis. In addition, anti-Müllerian hormone testing has not been well-described in the literature when used in cats with remnant ovarian tissue. These cases may be of value to clinicians discovering the absence of a uterine horn when performing an ovariohysterectomy on queens.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVeterinary Medicine and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207