MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W74558088

Microlaparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy in the morbidly obese patient.

2004· article· en· W74558088 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Oscar D. Almeida

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUterine Myomas and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHysterectomyUterine arteryDissection (medical)SurgeryMorbidly obeseVaginaProspective cohort studyBody mass indexLaparoscopyPregnancyWeight lossObesityGestationInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to demonstrate a minimally invasive, novel variation, microlaparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (MAVH) of a previously established technique, laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH), in the morbidly obese patient. METHODS: This was a prospective, descriptive feasibility study (Canadian Task Force classification 11-2) conducted at a university-affiliated hospital and private community hospital. Seven morbidly obese women with an average body mass index of 45.8 kg/m2 (range, 40.6 to 51.5) underwent microlaparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (MAVH). Microlaparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (MAVH), classified as Type 1B, including unilateral or bilateral occlusion and division of the ovarian artery(ies), either medial or lateral to the ovary(ies), with or without dissection of the adjacent broad ligament under microlaparoscopic guidance, in addition to incision of the vesicouterine peritoneum. RESULTS: The median duration of surgery was 109.1 minutes (range, 86 to 134), median blood loss was 207 mL (range, 100 to 350), and average length of stay in the hospital was 33.7 hours (range, 23 to 48). The complication rate was 0%. CONCLUSION: Microlaparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (MAVH) is a safe and effective, more minimally invasive method of performing laparoscopic hysterectomies in select morbidly obese patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicUterine Myomas and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207