The role of aromatase inhibitors in ameliorating deleterious effects of ovarian stimulation on outcome of infertility treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical utilization of ovulation stimulation to facilitate the ability of a couple to conceive has not only provided a valuable therapeutic approach, but has also yielded extensive information on the physiology of ovarian follicular recruitment, endometrial receptivity and early embryo competency. One of the consequences of the use of fertility enhancing agents for ovarian stimulation has been the creation of a hyperestrogenic state, which may influence each of these parameters. Use of aromatase inhibitors reduces hyperestrogenism inevitably attained during ovarian stimulation. In addition, the adjunct use of aromatase inhibitors during ovarian stimulation reduces amount of gonadotropins required for optimum stimulation. The unique approach of reducing hyperestrogenism, as well as lowering amount of gonadotropins without affecting the number of mature ovarian follicles is an exciting strategy that could result in improvement in the treatment outcome by ameliorating the deleterious effects of the ovarian stimulation on follicular development, endometrial receptivity, as well as oocyte and embryo quality.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".