MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104769512 · doi:10.1071/rd10224

Follicular somatic cell factors and follicle development

2011· review· en· W2104769512 on OpenAlexaff
J. Buratini, Christopher A. Price

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCegep de Saint Hyacinthe
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGranulosa cellSomatic cellCell biologyBiologyThecaFolliculogenesisAntral follicleOvarian follicleFollicleFollicular phaseFibroblast growth factorOocyteBone morphogenetic proteinInternal medicineEndocrinologyEmbryogenesisEmbryoReceptorGeneticsGeneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considerable attention is currently paid to oocyte-derived secreted factors that act upon cumulus and granulosa cells. Also important for follicle development are somatic cell-derived secreted factors. This is illustrated by the ability of granulosa cell-derived Kit ligand (KITL) to promote primordial follicle activation, and the loss of follicle development that accompanies KITL gene disruption. This review summarises our current understanding of somatic cell factors during both preantral and antral follicle growth, involving not only signalling from granulosa cells to the oocyte, but also signalling between granulosa and theca cells. Principal granulosa cell-derived factors include activin, anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) and fibroblast growth factors (FGFs). Theca cells also secrete BMPs and FGFs. The interplay between these factors is equally important for follicle growth as the activity of oocyte-derived factors.

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)0.000
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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations50
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207