Anti-Müllerian hormone and embryo quality as determined by time-lapse imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence as to whether serum anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) is a biomarker of oocyte quality in addition to its known role in assessing ovarian reserve. This study aims to examine the relationship between AMH and embryo potential as assessed by time-lapse imaging (TLI). METHODS: A total of 106 embryos from 67 patients were included in the study. All subjects were women with recorded pre-treatment AMH levels who underwent in vitro fertilization using a TLI embryo incubator. Exclusion criteria included cases of donor oocytes, rescue-ICSI, and >2 embryos transferred. Individual time measures, presence of multinucleation (MN), and composite TLI score were analyzed in relation to patient AMH. Linear regression was used to model AMH among embryo TLI parameters while controlling for age as a continuous covariate. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the mean AMH levels between patients in the normal and abnormal time frames for CC2, S2, and T5. Similarly, there was no significant difference in AMH levels based on composite TLI score or presence/absence of multinucleation. The lack of association between AMH levels and embryo TLI variables persisted after controlling for age (Grade P=0.19, CC2 P=0.47, S2 P=0.52, t5 P=0.34, MN P=0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Serum AMH is not predictive of embryo quality as assessed by TLI standardized time intervals, composite score, and presence of MN. From a clinical perspective, these findings suggest that diminished ovarian reserve alone does not imply poorer quality of individual embryos.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | medium |
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".