MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410251234 · doi:10.1002/ijgo.70139

Pregnancy after cancer: <scp>FIGO</scp> Best practice advice

2025· article· en· W4410251234 on OpenAlexaff
Cynthia Maxwell, Sumaiya Adam, Lina Bergman, Surabhi Nanda, Valerie T. Guinto, Noa Popovits‐Hadari, Maisah Al‐Bakri, Fionnuala M. McAuliffe, Inge Peters, Catherine Nelson‐Piercy, Frédéric Amant, Melanie Nana, Graeme N. Smith, Jonathan S. Berek, Orla McNally, Long Nguyen‐Hoang, Virna Patricia Medina-Palmezano, Sharleen O’Reilly, Francisco Ruiloba, Pat O’Brien, Bo Jacobsson, Sarikapan Wilailak, Liona C. Poon

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Risks and Factors
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's UniversityWomen's College HospitalMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyCancerEpidemiologyFamily medicineBest practiceHealth careGynecologyObstetricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in cancer care have led to a growing number of cancer survivors globally. As cancer increasingly affects women and people of reproductive age, more individuals will be experiencing pregnancy after completing cancer treatment. This Best Practice Advice manuscript describes the epidemiology of pregnancy after cancer, recommended clinical evaluation before pregnancy, key components of pregnancy care for cancer survivors, considerations for delivery planning and postpartum care, and suggested steps for future health and prevention.

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)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1770.060

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecology & ObstetricsSame topicCancer Risks and FactorsFrench-language works237,207