MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033676989 · doi:10.4161/spmg.22591

Vasectomy reversal in humans

2012· article· en· W2033676989 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron Bernie, E. Charles Osterberg, Peter J. Stahl, Ranjith Ramasamy, Marc Goldstein

Bibliographic record

VenueSpermatogenesis · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMale Reproductive Health Studies
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVasectomyVasectomy reversalVasovasostomyMedicineFamily planningMale SterilizationSurgeryObstetricsPopulationGynecologyResearch methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vasectomy is the most common urological procedure in the United States with 18% of men having a vasectomy before age 45. A significant proportion of vasectomized men ultimately request vasectomy reversal, usually due to divorce and/or remarriage. Vasectomy reversal is a commonly practiced but technically demanding microsurgical procedure that restores patency of the male excurrent ductal system in 80-99.5% of cases and enables unassisted pregnancy in 40-80% of couples. The discrepancy between the anastomotic patency rates and clinical pregnancy rates following vasectomy reversal suggests that some of the biological consequences of vasectomy may not be entirely reversible in all men. Herein we review what is known about the biological sequelae of vasectomy and vasectomy reversal in humans, and provide a succinct overview of the evaluation and surgical management of men desiring vasectomy reversal.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.121
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.347 · 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

Citations23
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpermatogenesisSame topicMale Reproductive Health StudiesFrench-language works237,207