MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992121166 · doi:10.1002/cncr.22105

Female gamete preservation

2006· review· en· W1992121166 on OpenAlexaff
Victoria Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFertility preservationMedicineCancerEmbryo cryopreservationOvarian tissue cryopreservationOocyte cryopreservationOncologyFertilityRadiation therapyAssisted reproductive technologyCryopreservationGynecologyInternal medicinePregnancyInfertilityPopulationEmbryoBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of multiple agent chemotherapy and combined modality treatment of childhood and adolescent cancers has markedly increased survival rates. Thus, the majority of young cancer patients survive into adulthood and the potential long-term consequences of the therapies are of ongoing concern. Alkylating agents have proven to be the most toxic to the ovaries; however radiation is also extremely gonadotoxic. In addition, combination of these modalities will produce additive effects in terms of ovarian damage (follicle depletion). As a result, there are increasing numbers of young cancer survivors with impaired or absent gonadal function. Advances in the field of assisted reproductive technology (ART) provide hope that the reproductive impact of cancer therapy can be reduced. Those technologies that may be applicable prior to gonadotoxic therapy are pretreatment ovarian protection with oral contraceptives or gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist; ART using pretreatment cryopreservation of embryos or gametes; posttreatment ART with donor gametes or embryos; or adoption. However, ovarian protection is not of proven benefit and oocyte/ovary cryopreservation has had only limited success to date. Information regarding cancer treatment's possible effects on fertility and ways to potentially circumvent these should be part of routine counseling to allow the patient to make an informed decision.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations28
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207