The economic consequences of multiple gestation pregnancy in assisted conception cycles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study estimates the projected costs of multiple births resulting from assisted conception cycles (in vitro fertilization with or without intracytoplasmic sperm injection and ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophin). The estimates are modelled from the volume of services, treatment success and multiple gestation rates in recent registry data. The coverage is restricted to hospital costs associated with delivery and the trends are projected to 2000 in the United States. Sensitivity analyses tested different assumptions about per annum trends in effectiveness, multiple pregnancy rates and health costs. The national cost of in vitro fertilization cycles is US$470.2 million (£313.5 million) and the cost of the multiple pregnancies from in vitro fertilization is US$639.9 million (£426.7 million). The national cost of ovarian stimulation cycles is US$166.6 million (£111.1 million) and the cost of the multiple pregnancies from ovarian stimulation is US$257.3 million (£171.6 million). Although costs are a limited indicator of the burden of illness, the projected national cost of multiple pregnancy associated with assisted conception in 2000 is greater than the base cost of the treatment. Prevention of multiple pregnancy in assisted conception cycles should be a priority.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it