MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171038270 · doi:10.1177/0272989x14535984

Predictive Modeling of Implantation Outcome in an In Vitro Fertilization Setting

2014· article· en· W2171038270 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Decision Making · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian function and disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIn vitro fertilisationOutcome (game theory)Human fertilizationMedicineComputer scienceIntensive care medicineBiologyPregnancyMathematicsMathematical economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Multiple embryo transfers in in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment increase the number of successful pregnancies while elevating the risk of multiple gestations. IVF-associated multiple pregnancies exhibit significant financial, social, and medical implications. Clinicians need to decide the number of embryos to be transferred considering the tradeoff between successful outcomes and multiple pregnancies. OBJECTIVE: To predict implantation outcome of individual embryos in an IVF cycle with the aim of providing decision support on the number of embryos transferred. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. DATA SOURCE: Electronic health records of one of the largest IVF clinics in Turkey. The study data set included 2453 embryos transferred at day 2 or day 3 after intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Each embryo was represented with 18 clinical features and a class label, +1 or -1, indicating positive and negative implantation outcomes, respectively. METHODS: For each classifier tested, a model was developed using two-thirds of the data set, and prediction performance was evaluated on the remaining one-third of the samples using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The training-testing procedure was repeated 10 times on randomly split (two-thirds to one-third) data. The relative predictive values of clinical input characteristics were assessed using information gain feature weighting and forward feature selection methods. RESULTS: The naïve Bayes model provided 80.4% accuracy, 63.7% sensitivity, and 17.6% false alarm rate in embryo-based implantation prediction. Multiple embryo implantations were predicted at a 63.8% sensitivity level. Predictions using the proposed model resulted in higher accuracy compared with expert judgment alone (on average, 75.7% and 60.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A machine learning-based decision support system would be useful in improving the success rates of IVF treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.318 · 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