MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000190315 · doi:10.1155/2014/234014

Growth Hormone and Reproduction: A Review of Endocrine and Autocrine/Paracrine Interactions

2014· review· en· W2000190315 on OpenAlexaff
Kerry Hull, S. Harvey

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Endocrinology · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de SherbrookeBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndocrinologyParacrine signallingInternal medicineSomatotropic cellEndocrine systemFertilityAutocrine signallingHormoneGrowth factorReproductionGonadotropinGrowth hormoneInsulin-like growth factorSomatic cellMedicineBiologyReceptorPopulationEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The somatotropic axis, consisting of growth hormone (GH), hepatic insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I), and assorted releasing factors, regulates growth and body composition. Axiomatically, since optimal body composition enhances reproductive function, general somatic actions of GH modulate reproductive function. A growing body of evidence supports the hypothesis that GH also modulates reproduction directly, exerting both gonadotropin-dependent and gonadotropin-independent actions in both males and females. Moreover, recent studies indicate GH produced within reproductive tissues differs from pituitary GH in terms of secretion and action. Accordingly, GH is increasingly used as a fertility adjunct in males and females, both humans and nonhumans. This review reconsiders reproductive actions of GH in vertebrates in respect to these new conceptual developments.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations173
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of EndocrinologySame topicGrowth Hormone and Insulin-like Growth FactorsFrench-language works237,207