MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221009865 · doi:10.1186/s40168-021-01184-w

Endometrial microbiota composition is associated with reproductive outcome in infertile patients

2022· article· en· W4221009865 on OpenAlexaff
Inmaculada Moreno, Iolanda Garcia-Grau, David Pérez-Villaroya, Marta Gonzáléz-Monfort, Mustafa Bahçeci, Marcelo J. Barrionuevo, Sagiri Taguchi, Elena Puente, Michael DiMattina, Mei Wei Lim, Georgina Meneghini, Mira Aubuchon, M.P. Leondires, Alexandra Izquierdo, Martina Perez-Olgiati, Alejandro Chávez-Badiola, Ken Seethram, Davide Baù, Carlos Gómez, Diana Valbuena, Felipe Vilella, Carlos Simón

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrobiome · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsPacific Centre for Reproductive Medicine
FundersInstituto de Salud Carlos IIIHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeMinisterio de Asuntos Económicos y Transformación Digital, Gobierno de EspañaMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadMinisterio de Educación, Cultura y DeporteEuropean CommissionConselleria d'Educació, Investigació, Cultura i EsportMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
KeywordsBiologyMiscarriageUreaplasmaPregnancyMicrobiomeGardnerella vaginalisReproductive medicineEmbryo transferGynecologyObstetricsBacterial vaginosisMedicineBioinformaticsMicrobiologyMycoplasmaGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Previous evidence indicates associations between the female reproductive tract microbiome composition and reproductive outcome in infertile patients undergoing assisted reproduction. We aimed to determine whether the endometrial microbiota composition is associated with reproductive outcomes of live birth, biochemical pregnancy, clinical miscarriage or no pregnancy. METHODS: Here, we present a multicentre prospective observational study using 16S rRNA gene sequencing to analyse endometrial fluid and biopsy samples before embryo transfer in a cohort of 342 infertile patients asymptomatic for infection undergoing assisted reproductive treatments. RESULTS: A dysbiotic endometrial microbiota profile composed of Atopobium, Bifidobacterium, Chryseobacterium, Gardnerella, Haemophilus, Klebsiella, Neisseria, Staphylococcus and Streptococcus was associated with unsuccessful outcomes. In contrast, Lactobacillus was consistently enriched in patients with live birth outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that endometrial microbiota composition before embryo transfer is a useful biomarker to predict reproductive outcome, offering an opportunity to further improve diagnosis and treatment strategies. Video Abstract.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations311
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrobiomeSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207