Oocyte maturation abnormalities - A systematic review of the evidence and mechanisms in a rare but difficult to manage fertility pheneomina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A small proportion of infertile women experience repeated oocyte maturation abnormalities (OMAS). OMAS include degenerated and dysmorphic oocytes, empty follicle syndrome, oocyte maturation arrest (OMA), resistant ovary syndrome and maturation defects due to primary ovarian insufficiency. Genetic factors play an important role in OMAS but still need specifications. This review documents the spectrum of OMAS and to evaluate the multiple subtypes classified as OMAS. In this review, readers will be able to understand the oocyte maturation mechanism, gene expression and their regulation that lead to different subtypes of OMAs, and it will discuss the animal and human studies related to OMAS and lastly the treatment options for OMAs. Literature searches using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence were performed to identify articles written in English focusing on Oocyte Maturation Abnormalities by looking for the following relevant keywords. A search was made with the specified keywords and included books and documents, clinical trials, animal studies, human studies, meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials, reviews, systematic reviews and options written in english. The search detected 3,953 sources published from 1961 to 2021. After title and abstract screening for study type, duplicates and relevancy, 2,914 studies were excluded. The remaining 1,039 records were assessed for eligibility by full-text reading and 886 records were then excluded. Two hundred and twenty seven full-text articles and 0 book chapters from the database were selected for inclusion. Overall, 227 articles, one unpublished and one abstract paper were included in this final review. In this review study, OMAS were classified and extensively evaluatedand possible treatment options under the light of current information, present literature and ongoing studies. Either genetic studies or in vitro maturation studies that will be handled in the future will lead more informations to be reached and may make it possible to obtain pregnancies.
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 | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".