MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139430083 · doi:10.1186/s12958-021-00729-w

A rodent model of human dose-equivalent progestin-only implantable contraception

2021· article· en· W3139430083 on OpenAlexaff
Heather C. M. Allaway, Roger A. Pierson, Jesse Invik, Susan A. Bloomfield

Bibliographic record

VenueReproductive Biology and Endocrinology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEstrous cycleProgestinEtonogestrelPelletAnalysis of variancePhysiologyPlaceboInternal medicineGynecologyEndocrinologyPopulationHormoneFamily planningBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Long-acting, reversible contraceptives (LARC; progestin only) are an increasingly common hormonal contraceptive choice in reproductive aged women looking to suppress ovarian function and menstrual cyclicity. The overall objective was to develop and validate a rodent model of implanted etonogestrel (ENG) LARC, at body size equivalent doses to the average dose received by women during each of the first 3 years of ENG subdermal rod LARC use. METHODS: Intact, virgin, female Sprague-Dawley rats (16-wk-old) were randomized to 1 of 4 groups (n = 8/group) of ENG LARC (high-0.30μg/d, medium-0.17μg/d, low-0.09μg/d, placebo-0.00μg/d) via a slow-release pellet implanted subcutaneously. Animals were monitored for 21 days before and 29 days following pellet implantation using vaginal smears, ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM), saphenous blood draws, food consumption, and body weights. Data were analyzed by chi-square, non-parametric, univariate, and repeated measures 2-way ANOVA. RESULTS: Prior to pellet implantation there was no difference in time spent in estrus cycle phases among the treatment groups (p > 0.30). Following pellet implantation there was a dose-dependent impact on the time spent in diestrus and estrus (p < 0.05), with the high dose group spending more days in diestrus and fewer days in estrus. Prior to pellet insertion there was not an association between treatment group and estrus cycle classification (p = 0.57) but following pellet implantation there was a dose-dependent association with cycle classification (p < 0.02). Measurements from the UBM (ovarian volume, follicle count, corpora lutea count) indicate an alteration of ovarian function following pellet implantation. CONCLUSION: Assessment of estrus cyclicity indicated a dose-response relationship in the shift to a larger number of acyclic rats and longer in duration spent in the diestrus phase. Therefore, each dose in this model mimics some of the changes observed in the ovaries of women using ENG LARC and provides an opportunity for investigating the impacts on non-reproductive tissues in the future.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproductive Biology and EndocrinologySame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207