MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404135120 · doi:10.1016/j.crwh.2024.e00663

Septic shock after a saline infusion hysterosalpingosonogram in a woman with stage IV endometriosis and infertility: A case report

2024· article· en· W4404135120 on OpenAlexaff
Mariah Colussi, Geneviève Horwood, Jenna Gale, Sukhbir S. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Women s Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa Fertility CentreOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndometriosisSeptic shockStage (stratigraphy)InfertilitySalineShock (circulatory)GynecologySurgeryAnesthesiaSepsisPregnancyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Saline infusion sonohysterography/hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography is commonly used in the work-up of infertility. Overall, pelvic infection following these investigations is rare, but risk may be increased in patients with deep infiltrating endometriosis. Antibiotic prophylaxis is not professionally recommended in patients with advanced endometriosis, a point that requires reconsideration. A 29-year-old woman with stage IV endometriosis presented with pelvic inflammatory disease and sepsis following a saline hysterosalpingo-contrast sonogram for investigation of infertility. Her infection was resistant to antibiotic treatment and she required extensive surgical intervention for source control, which impacted her fertility. The immunodeficient pelvic microenvironment in patients with endometriosis and endometrioma can increase the risk and severity of pelvic infection. Antibiotic prophylaxis should always be utilized in those with stage IV endometriosis who are due to undergo saline infusion sonohysterography or hysterosalpingo-sonography.

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)0.004
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in Women s HealthSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207