A patient and physician friendly stimulation protocol using long acting FSH and progestin priming should be the future of IVF
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Needle phobias and concern about the discomfort remain significant disincentives for many women contemplating in vitro fertilization (IVF). The number of injections required in an IVF cycle is increased by the use of most medications which prevent premature ovulation. Mechanism: long-acting follicular stimulation hormone (LA-FSH) that was developed 15 years ago has the ability to stimulate folliculogenesis in a patient for seven days with a single injection, with comparable outcomes to daily injections in assisted reproduction. Many clinicians were hesitated to use it in their patients, fearing an inability to decrease levels of FSH stimulation for 7 days and the resultant increased risks of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). This occurred prior to the widespread adoption of Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)-agonist triggering and freeze all embryos for the prevention of OHSS. Conclusions: We suggest LA-FSH protocol with the use of progestins to prevent ovulation, which could be an alternative way to treat IVF patients without any compromise of the effectiveness of the treatments or the safety of the 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".