Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ovarian stimulation regimes may be hazardous to a small proportion of women or may result in side effects. For such women IVM is recommended. IVM technology can be divided into two main approaches, namely (i) FSH and (ii) hCG priming. These two approaches improve oocyte maturation and pregnancy rates when the immature oocytes are retrieved from women with PCOS. Although the size of follicles appears to be important for subsequent embryonic development however the developmental competence of oocytes derived from the small antral follicles seems not to be adversely affected by the presence of a dominant follicle. In general, the clinical pregnancy and implantation rates per ET are now in the order of 35–40% and 10–15% respectively in women with PCOS following IVM. The combination of natural cycle IVF with immature oocyte retrieval followed by IVM is an attractive treatment alternative for women with various forms of infertility without recourse to ovarian stimulation. Natural cycle IVF/M together with IVM alone can be used to treat more than half of the population of infertile patients with acceptable pregnancy rate. Approximately 2,000 healthy infants have been born following immature oocyte retrieval and IVM.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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.
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".