MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2401840272 · doi:10.1055/s-2004-823028

Aromatase Inhibitors in Ovulation Induction

2004· review· en· W2401840272 on OpenAlexaff
M.F. Mitwally, Robert F. Casper

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Reproductive Medicine · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian function and disorders
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAromataseOvulation inductionOvulationLetrozoleControlled ovarian hyperstimulationEstrogenInfertilityInternal medicineAromatase inhibitorMedicineEndocrinologyHormoneBiologyPregnancyCancerBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The new third generation aromatase inhibitors are extremely potent and specific oral inhibitors of estrogen production. We reported the success of using aromatase inhibitors for induction of ovulation in World Health Organization (WHO) type II anovulatory patients. Promising pregnancy rates were associated with the use of aromatase inhibitors for induction of ovulation in these women. In addition, the use of aromatase inhibition in conjunction with gonadotropin injection was associated with a significant reduction in the gonadotropin dose required for optimum controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. We believe that these oral agents are efficient and safe and have many advantages compared with clomiphene citrate (CC). We propose that aromatase inhibitors will replace CC in the future as the new primary treatment for ovulation induction. In this review, we present an update on the use of aromatase inhibitors for induction of ovulation and we discuss several new areas of potential interest regarding the use of aromatase inhibitors, either alone or together with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) for infertility treatment. Further research in these areas may demonstrate an expanded role in assisted reproductive technologies.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations87
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Reproductive MedicineSame topicOvarian function and disordersFrench-language works237,207