SOGC/GOC JOINT CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES Progesterone-Only and Non-Hormonal Contraception in the Breast Cancer Survivor: Joint Review and Committee Opinion of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada and the Society of Gynecologic Onco
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To examine the relationship between progestin-only contraception and breast cancer, and to make recommendations regarding contraception for the breast cancer survivor. Outcome: Incidence of breast cancer among users of progestin-only contraception. Evidence: PubMed and Medline databases were searched using the terms “breast cancer ” and “progesterone, ” “contraception, ” “depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, ” “Micronor, ” “Mirena, ” and “subdermal implant. ” The citations were limited to the English language. References were searched for other relevant articles. The quality of evidence is described using the classification of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Exam. Benefits, Harms, and Costs: Providing reliable contraception and non-contraceptive benefits to breast cancer survivors versus
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.007 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".