Intramuscular versus Vaginal Progesterone Administration in Medicated Frozen Embryo Transfer Cycles: A Randomized Clinical Trial Assessing Sub-Endometrial Contractions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to assess whether sub-endometrial contractility is reduced by the use of intramuscular (IM) progesterone. DESIGN: This is a randomized clinical trial. Patients assigned to a medicated day 5 frozen embryo transfer (FET) were randomly allocated to "vaginal progesterone" or "IM progesterone": patients randomized to the vaginal arm were treated with 200 mg micronized progesterone 3 times daily while patients randomized into the IM progesterone arm were treated with a single daily injection of 50 mg progesterone in oil. The main outcome measure was the number of sub-endometrial contractions (waves) per minute 1 day before a blastocyst embryo transfer. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were enrolled. The progesterone serum concentration was significantly higher in patients using the IM progesterone (85.2 ± 50.1 vs. 30.3 ± 11.2 nmol/L, respectively) but this did not translate into a lower sub-endometrial contractility (2.4 ± 4.8 vs. 1.4 ± 1.1 contraction/min, respectively). Clinical pregnancy rates were comparable between groups. The number of sub-endometrial waves was significantly lower among pregnant patients (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The use of IM progesterone in medicated FET cycles does not reduce the sub-endometrial activity compared to vaginal progesterone administration. Our data support a poor clinical pregnancy outcome with high wave activity, regardless of the progesterone mode.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".