Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemotherapy and radiation treatment for malignancies or other conditions such as hematologic and autoimmune disorders, have resulted in improved survival rates but may lead to sterility. Women who postpone conception until late reproductive years are also at increased risk to become infertile. The purpose of our review is to evaluate advances and techniques for fertility preservation. We performed a literature search using the keywords fertility preservation, vitrification, oocytes, embryo, ovarian cryopreservation, and ovarian suspension and conducted the search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of systematic reviews. The results show that today, it is possible to cryopreserve oocytes, embryos, or ovarian tissue. The most commonly used technique remains embryo cryopreservation. Another improvement is the development of vitrification or rapid freezing technique. For women undergoing local pelvic radiation, one should consider ovarian suspension. Medical professionals, patients, and their families should be aware that in some conditions, the reproductive function can be preserved. Although one cannot guarantee future fertility, a realistic hope for women at risk of having premature ovarian failure can now be offered.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".