MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331272521 · doi:10.1097/grf.0b013e3181f9718f

In Vitro Maturation of Oocytes as a Strategy for Fertility Preservation

2010· review· en· W2331272521 on OpenAlexaff
Barış Ata, Einat Shalom‐Paz, Ri‐Cheng Chian, Seang Lin Tan

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Obstetrics & Gynecology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFertility preservationIn vitro fertilisationMedicineOocyte cryopreservationOocyteLuteal phaseIn vitro maturationAndrologyEmbryo cryopreservationCryopreservationFertilityEstrogenEmbryoEmbryo transferVitrificationGynecologyFollicular phaseInternal medicineBiologyPopulationCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In vitro fertilization and embryo cryopreservation are regarded as the only established method for the preservation of fertility in female cancer patients. However, a possible delay in the treatment of cancer and exposure to supraphysiologic estrogen levels caused by ovarian stimulation raise concerns for patients and physicians. In vitro maturation avoids treatment delay or exposure to increased estradiol levels associated with in vitro fertilization. In vitro maturation combined with embryo or oocyte vitrification provides options that have been unavailable earlier, such as immature oocyte collection in the luteal phase, for some patients and improves the services provided by a fertility preservation program.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations29
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Obstetrics & GynecologySame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207