Vitrification of a small number of spermatozoa in normozoospermic and severely oligozoospermic samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite broad utilization of sperm cryopreservation, little progress has been made to modify freezing protocols or to improve rates of sperm survival. Vitrification is an alternative method for freezing human spermatozoa without toxic permeable cryoprotectants (CPAs). The purpose of our study was to optimize the vitrification and post thaw recovery of a small number of spermatozoa using only nonpermeating CPAs in a closed straw system in normozoospermic and severely oligozoospermic samples. Individual motile spermatozoa (n = 295) were selected from semen samples of 15 normozoospermic and 10 severe oligozoospermia patients. Overall sperm recovery after vitrification was 80% (n = 236) with 80% (n = 189) viability and 41.5% (n = 98) retained post-warming motility. Two different loading techniques were compared to transfer selected spermatozoa into straws in preparation for vitrification: by spontaneous capillary action (CA) and with the aid of a polar body biopsy (PBB) pipette. There was evidence that the PBB loading technique increases the odds of spermatozoa recovery in both subsets (p = 0.01 and p = 0.04) in the normal and abnormal subsamples, respectively.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".