MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205146816 · doi:10.5534/wjmh.210159

Artificial Intelligence Based Machine Learning Models Predict Sperm Parameter Upgrading after Varicocele Repair: A Multi-Institutional Analysis

2022· article· en· W4205146816 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe World Journal of Men s Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSperm and Testicular Function
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of TorontoDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaricoceleMedicineInfertilityUpgradeMale infertilitySemenSemen analysisUrologyGynecologyAndrologyComputer sciencePregnancyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Varicocele repair is recommended in the presence of a clinical varicocele together with at least one abnormal semen parameter, and male infertility. Unfortunately, up to 50% of men who meet criteria for repair will not see meaningful benefit in outcomes despite successful treatment. We developed an artificial intelligence (AI) model to predict which men with varicocele will benefit from treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified men with infertility, clinical varicocele, and at least one abnormal semen parameter from two large urology centers in North America (Miami and Toronto) between 2006 and 2020. We collected pre and post-operative clinical and hormonal data following treatment. Clinical upgrading was defined as an increase in sperm concentration that would allow a couple to access previously unavailable reproductive options. The tiers used for upgrading were: 1-5 million/mL (ICSI/IVF), 5-15 million/mL (IUI) and >15 million/mL (natural conception). Thus moving from ICSI/IVF to IUI, or from IUI to natural conception, would be considered an upgrade. AI models were trained and tested using R to predict which patients were likely to upgrade after surgery. The model sorted men into categories that defined how likely they were to upgrade after surgery (likely, equivocal, and unlikely). RESULTS: Data from 240 men were included from both centers. A total of 45.6% of men experienced an upgrade in sperm concentration following surgery, 48.1% did not change, and 6.3% downgraded. The data from Miami were used to create a random forest model for predicting upgrade in sperm concentration. On external validation using Toronto data, the model accurately predicted upgrade in 87% of men deemed likely to improve, and in 49% and 36% of men who were equivocal and unlikely to improve, respectively. Overall, the personalized prediction for patients in the validation cohort was accurate (AUC 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: A machine learning model performed well in predicting clinically meaningful post-varicocelectomy sperm parameters using pre-operative hormonal, clinical, and semen analysis data. To our knowledge, this is the first prediction model to show the utility of hormonal data, as well as the first to use machine learning models to predict clinically meaningful upgrading. This model will be published online as a clinical calculator that can be used in the preoperative counseling of patients.

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.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.246 · 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