MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051636067 · doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e31825ec2ee

Effect of Long-Term Combined Oral Contraceptive Pill Use on Endometrial Thickness

2012· article· en· W2051636067 on OpenAlexaff
Nayana Talukdar, Yaakov Bentov, Paul T. Chang, Navid Esfandiari, Zohreh Nazemian, Robert F. Casper

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsOccupational Cancer Research CentreMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalPillOdds ratioEndometriumGynecologyOral contraceptive pillObstetricsPopulationInternal medicineFamily planningResearch methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To estimate whether there is any association of long-term use of combined oral contraceptive pills (OCP) with adverse endometrial growth. METHODS: We reviewed the charts of 137 patients with history of OCP use undergoing endometrial preparation with estrogen for frozen embryo transfer. Endometrial thickness was measured by transvaginal ultrasonography on day 10 after menses and patients were divided into two groups (less than 7 mm and 7 mm or more). RESULTS: Thirty patients had endometrial thickness less than 7 mm and 107 had thickness of 7 mm or more. Mean years of combined OCP use in each group were 9.8±4.54 and 5.8±4.52, respectively (P<.001). With 10 years of combined OCP use as the threshold, the difference between the two groups (63.35% users in less than 7 mm group compared with 28.04% in the 7 mm or more thickness group) was highly significant (P<.001 by Fisher exact test), with an odds ratio of 4.43 (95% confidence interval 1.89-10.41). Past use of 5 years of OCPs was also associated with a significant (P=.002) difference in endometrial thickness. The mean endometrial thicknesses on cycle day 10 in patients using combined OCP for less than 10 years and 10 years or more were 9.54±1.88 mm and 8.48±2.33 mm, respectively, with P=.007. The mean endometrial thickness was 9.72±1.69 mm in less than 5 years and 8.81±2.23 mm in 5 or more years of use, respectively (P=.008). Cycle cancellation rates in the less than 7 mm group and 7 mm or greater endometrial thickness group were 23% and 4%, respectively (P=.002), but there was no difference in the clinical pregnancy rates between the two groups (13% compared with 27%, respectively; P=.15). CONCLUSION: Long-term combined OCP use (5 years or more) can potentially affect optimal endometrial growth, leading to a higher cancellation rate and longer stimulation in frozen embryo transfer cycles. These findings suggest a previously unidentified adverse effect of long-term combined OCP use in women who are anticipating future fertility. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.023
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.290 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207