Follicular synchronization using transdermal estradiol patch and GnRH antagonists in the luteal phase; does it increase oocyte yield in poor responders to gonadotropin stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF)? A comparative study with microdose flare-up protocol
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the oocyte yield with the luteal estradiol patch (LPA) - GnRH antagonist and microdose (MD) flare-up protocols in anticipated poor responders. Fifty-seven women who underwent IVF treatment following stimulation with LPA or MD protocols at McGill Reproductive Centre were matched for age and markers of ovarian reserve. Numbers of oocytes collected (6 vs 7), mature oocytes collected (5 vs 5), and oocyte maturation rates (72% vs 74%) were similar. The numbers of good quality embryos available (2 vs 1) and embryos transferred (3 vs 3) were likewise similar. Embryo implantation rate of 16.7% and clinical pregnancy rate of 38.9% achieved in the LPA group were almost 50% higher than the corresponding figures at 10.3% and 22.2% in the MD group; however, the differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). Although the results do not suggest an increased oocyte yield or follicular synchronization with the LPA protocol, the observed trend toward higher embryo implantation and clinical pregnancy rates requires further research.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it