MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008694862 · doi:10.2174/157340408786848188

Fertility Preservation for Young Women with Cancer: Hope for the Future

2008· article· en· W2008694862 on OpenAlexaff
Michael S. Neal, Lindsay DiPaolo, Katie Willoughby, Mehrnoosh Faghih, Megan Karnis, Edward G. Hughes, Carol Portwine

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Women s Health Reviews · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFertility preservationFertilityMedicineCancerPregnancyDiseaseGeneral partnershipYoung adultGynecologyFamily medicineIntensive care medicineGerontologyPolitical sciencePopulationEnvironmental healthInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in the diagnosis and successful treatment of childhood, adolescent, and adult cancers have allowed many young women to lead healthy lives after overcoming their disease. However, life-saving cancer treatment often impairs fertility. Chemotherapy and/or radiation may irreversibly damage the reproductive system. The maturing field of assisted conception, and specifically cryopreservation, has created a unique partnership between oncologists and fertility specialists. Improving assisted conception success and fertility sparing strategies provide options for young women who would like to have children of their own after cancer treatment. This review article focuses on the current practices and developing opportunities for women who wish to preserve their fertility when faced with gonadotoxic cancer treatment. Keywords: Fertility preservation, oncology, cancer, female, pregnancy, assisted conception

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.125
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Women s Health ReviewsSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207