Rescue <i>In Vitro</i> Maturation in Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome Patients Undergoing <i>In Vitro</i> Fertilization Treatment who Overrespond or Underrespond to Ovarian Stimulation: Is It A Viable Option? A Case Series Study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: fertilization (IVF) treatment who have inappropriate responses to ovarian stimulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective case series study of five PCOS patients undergoing IVF treatment considered for cycle cancellation due to increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) as group A or poor response to ovarian stimulation as group B. Patients in group A had high oestradiol levels and recruitment of high numbers of small/intermediate sized follicles that did not meet the criteria for human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) triggering. Patients in group B responded inadequately to hormonal stimulation despite high gonadotropin dosage. Treatment was changed to rescue IVM cycles after the patients provided consent. RESULTS: . There were 13 cleaving embryos obtained. One patient had a live birth, whilst the other suffered a miscarriage. CONCLUSION: Rescue IVM could be a viable option in PCOS patients undergoing IVF treatment who are unable to safely meet the criteria for hCG triggering due to overresponse to ovarian stimulation or ovarian resistance to high doses of stimulation. Conversion to IVM can still result in reasonable oocyte retrieval and lead to clinical pregnancy and live births without the risks of OHSS.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".