Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preservation of female fertility is an important issue today. There are a few effective clinical options for preserving female fertility. Conventional IVF followed by embryo cryopreservation is the only established procedure but is not applicable to all women. Oocyte cryopreservation avoids the ethical and moral concerns related to cryopreservation of embryos but conventional slow freezing methods are associated with low survival rate of oocytes. The main objective of this translational research thesis was to develop an efficient and safe methodology for oocyte cryopreservation that is clinically applicable for female fertility preservation. Specific research objectives were to investigate cryobiology of oocytes in terms of: 1) cryoprotectant (CPA) toxicity effect on oocyte ultra-structures and embryonic developmental potential; 2) Vitrification versus conventional slow freezing of oocytes and their effects of oocyte structures and embryonic developmental potential; 3) Vitrification of embryos using the McGill Cryoleaf and its effect of embryonic development and DNA fragmentation; 4) Clinical efficacy of oocyte vitrification in prospective clinical trials; 5) Effects of oocyte vitrification in terms of the clinical obstetrical and perinatal outcomes; 6) Clinical applications of vitrification of oocytes for preservation of female fertility. The CPA mixture of ethylene glycol (EG) and 1,2-propanediol (PROH) was found to be the most suitable combination for oocyte vitrification, resulting in high embryo development and the least DNA fragmentation. Vitrification of oocyte using the CPA mixture of EG and PROH in combination with the McGill Cryoleaf system is superior to the conventional slow-cooling method, resulting in better preservation of egg ultra-structures and functions. The reduced embryonic development potential of cryopreserved oocyte is related to increased DNA fragmentation and activation of caspase enzymes. Vitrification of human oocytes using the McG
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".