Office vaginoscopic hysteroscopic in infertle women: effects of gynecologist experience, instrument size and distention medium on patients discomfort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the roles of instrument diameter (5.0- or 3.5-mm external sheath), uterine distention medium (carbon dioxide [CO(2)] or saline solution), and hysteroscopist experience in diagnostic hysteroscopy. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, multicenter trial (Canadian Task Force classification I). SETTING: Two university medical centers in Italy. PATIENTS: One hundred eighty-four women attending an infertility clinic. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to undergo conventional hysteroscopy (group 1, n = 92) or minihysteroscopy (group 2, n = 92) with CO(2) or saline solution as distention medium. The procedures were performed by hysteroscopists with varying degrees of experience. Patient discomfort was analyzed using the visual analog score. Procedure complications and patient satisfaction rate were also recorded. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Independent of hysteroscopist experience, less pain, fewer complications, and higher satisfaction rates were observed with minihysteroscopy. In addition, procedures in which saline solution was used resulted in less pain and fewer complications than those in which CO(2) was used, but only when performed by inexperienced hysteroscopists. CONCLUSION: Instrument diameter and hysteroscopist experience, but not the distention medium, seem to be the primary variables that affect the perception of discomfort during office hysteroscopy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".