MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033705380 · doi:10.1093/hropen/hoaa022

CARTR Plus: the creation of an ART registry in Canada

2020· article· en· W3033705380 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrea Lanes, Deshayne B. Fell, Mari Teitelbaum, AE Sprague, M Johnson, H Wang, Maureen Elliott, Yanfang Guo, Lynn Meng, A. Albert Yuzpe, F. Bissonnette, MC Leveille, MC Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Reproduction Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsOttawa Fertility CentreOttawa HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFertilityPregnancyMedicineInfertilityEmbryo transferLive birthPregnancy rateAssisted reproductive technologyObstetricsPopulationGynecologyFertility clinicDemographyBiologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY QUESTION: What is the status of fertility treatment and birth outcomes documented over the first 6 years of the Canadian Assisted Reproductive Technologies Register (CARTR) Plus registry? SUMMARY ANSWER: The CARTR Plus registry is a robust database containing comprehensive Canadian fertility treatment data to assist with providing evidence-based rationale for clinical practice change. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The rate of infertility is increasing globally and having data on fertility treatment cycles and outcomes at a population level is important for accurately documenting and effecting changes in clinical practice. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: This is a descriptive manuscript of 183 739 fertility treatment cycles from 36 Canadian clinics over 6 years from the CARTR Plus registry. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: Canadian ART treatment cycles from 2013 through 2018 were included. This manuscript described trends in type of fertility treatment cycles, pregnancy rates, multiple pregnancy rates, primary transfer rates and birth outcomes. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Over the 6 years of the CARTR Plus registry, the number of treatment cycles performed ranged from less than 200 to greater than 1000 per clinic. Patient age and the underlying cause of infertility were two of the most variable characteristics across clinics. Similar clinical pregnancy rates were found among IVF and frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles with own oocytes (38.9 and 39.7% per embryo transfer cycle, respectively). Fertility treatment cycles that used donor oocytes had a higher clinical pregnancy rate among IVF cycles compared with FET cycles (54.9 and 39.8% per embryo transfer cycle, respectively). The multiple pregnancy rate was 7.4% per ongoing clinical pregnancy in 2018, which reflected a decreasing trend across the study period. Between 2013 and 2017, there were 31 811 pregnancies that had live births from all ART treatment cycles, which corresponded to a live birth rate of 21.4% per cycle start and 89.1% of these pregnancies were singleton live births. The low multiple pregnancy rate and high singleton birth rate are associated with the increase in single embryo transfers. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: There is potential for misclassification of data, which is present in all administrative health databases. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The CARTR Plus registry is a robust resource for ART data in Canada. It provides easily accessible aggregated data for Canadian fertility clinics, and it contains data that are internationally comparable. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: There was no funding provided for this study. The authors have no competing interests to declare.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Reproduction OpenSame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207