A prospective controlled study of the effect of intramural uterine fibroids on the outcome of assisted conception
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although uterine fibroids occur in 30% of women and are associated with a degree of subfertility, the effect of intramural fibroids on the outcome of IVF or ICSI treatment has not been prospectively studied. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected on 434 women undergoing IVF/ICSI in the assisted conception unit of an inner London teaching hospital. Patients were assessed for the presence of fibroids by transvaginal ultrasound and hysterosonography or hysteroscopy where appropriate. RESULTS: During the study period, 112 women with (study), and 322 women without (controls), intramural fibroids were treated. Patients were similar regarding the cause and duration of their infertility, number of previous treatments, and basal serum FSH concentration. Women in the study group were on average 2 years older (36.4 versus 34.6 years; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the duration of ovarian stimulation or gonadotrophin requirement, number of follicles developed, oocytes collected, embryos available for transfer or replaced. When analysing only women with intramural fibroids of < or =5 cm in size (n = 106) pregnancy, implantation and ongoing pregnancy rates were significantly reduced: 23.3, 11.9 and 15.1 respectively compared with 34.1, 20.2 and 28.3% in the control group (P = 0.016, P = 0.018 and P = 0.003). The mean size of the largest fibroids was 2.3 cm (90% range 2.1-2.5 cm). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the presence of intramural fibroids was one of the significant variables affecting the chance of an ongoing pregnancy, even after controlling for the number of embryos available for replacement and increasing age, particularly age > or =40 years, odds ratio 0.46 (CI 0.24-0.88; P = 0.019). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that an intramural fibroid halves the chances of an ongoing pregnancy following assisted conception.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".