MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ORIGINAL ARTICLE: High Expression of <scp>l</scp>‐Selectin Ligand in Secretory Endometrium is Associated with Better Endometrial Receptivity and Facilitates Embryo Implantation in Human Being

2008· article· en· W2136317365 on OpenAlexaff
Bo Wang, Jian‐Zhong Sheng, Rong‐Huan He, Yuli Qian, Fan Jin, He‐Feng Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Reproductive Immunology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive System and Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndometriumEmbryo transferAndrologyPregnancyWestern blotEmbryoEndocrinologyGynecologyInternal medicineBiologyMedicineCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PROBLEM: L-selectin ligand has displayed mediating adhesion at the maternal-fetal interface. Therefore, we investigated the impact of L-selectin ligand on establishing pregnancy in women undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET). METHOD OF STUDY: Endometrium between cycle days LH +6 to +9 was obtained from 56 Chinese women referred for IVF and tested for L-selectin ligand by immunohistochemistry and Western blot. The standard gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist long protocol was used for ovarian stimulation. RESULTS: L-selectin ligand was localized in the endometrial gland and luminal epithelial cells. Western blot analysis of endometrium identified four bands and levels of component 1, 2 and 4 were significantly higher in the pregnancy group than in the non-pregnancy group (P < 0.05). Clinical pregnancy and implantation rates were higher in patients with high level L-selectin ligand compared with those with low level (53.6%versus 25.0%, and 27.1%versus 12.1%, respectively, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The presence of higher level L-selectin ligand was associated with a better pregnancy outcome.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0050.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations47
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Reproductive ImmunologySame topicReproductive System and PregnancyFrench-language works237,207