MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327932604 · doi:10.1055/s-0043-1763374

Evaluate the Long-Term Efficacy and Patient Satisfaction Following Embolization of Pelvic Congestion

2023· article· en· W4327932604 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Bentridi, Saskia Hazout, Farouk Tradi, Patrick Gilbert, Amina Hadjadj, M.F. Giroux, Gilles Soulez

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Arab Journal of Interventional Radiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiagnosis and Treatment of Venous Diseases
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTerm (time)Patient satisfactionEmbolizationRadiologyComputer scienceSurgeryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Pelvic varices are frequent, could be found in 10% of women, and 40% of them may develop pelvic congestion syndrome. The IR treatment is known to be efficient but the approaches and methods are quite different between centers and doctors, mainly to prove the effectiveness of a sequential treatment. Method(s): A retrospective study included 246 patients embolized for SCP between 2003 and 2021 combined with cross-sectional questionnaires. All adult females who had pelvic congestion syndrome embolization in our center were included, and patients lost at follow-up were excluded. Demographic data, patient's symptoms, procedural details, assessment of patient symptom evolution compared with baseline in percentage, and occurrence of complications were documented. Result(s): From 246 women (M = 42 years), 192 were included, 20% had previous treatment for leg varices. The main symptoms were pelvic pain in 79%, lower limb pain in 55%, and postcoital dyspareunia in 49%. A total of 505 procedures were performed (mean per patient = 2,09). Usually, the ovarian veins were embolized in the first. Conclusion(s): The endovascular treatment of PSC is effective and safe with 80% of long-term improvement. Best results are obtained in sequential treatment with more than one session of embolization. Publication History Article published online: 09 February 2023 © 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd. A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Arab Journal of Interventional RadiologySame topicDiagnosis and Treatment of Venous DiseasesFrench-language works237,207