Bibliographic record
Abstract
Successful human uterine transplantation followed by subsequent pregnancy and live birth in a woman for whom this would otherwise have been impossible is a laudable goal. Research programs have been developed in several countries aimed at achieving this goal. The pioneering Swedish program has reported live births in six women, two of whom had a second pregnancy and birth. Five other live births have been reported from other countries. Most transplants were from a live donor, although recently a live birth has been reported following transplant from a deceased donor. The surgical procedure on a live donor is highly invasive, complex, hazardous, and long and may decrease her quality of life. The use of a deceased donor would partly simplify this issue and is being explored in several centers. Also explored are technical modifications to simplify the procedure and shorten the operating times. The American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) reminds us of the full array of options available to patients: 'including gestational carriers (surrogacy), adoption and child-free living'. The ASRM also recommends 55 years as the upper age limit for transfer of donor oocytes and embryos in healthy women. Would it not be more practical and less onerous for the prospective live donor to carry the pregnancy instead? Uterine transplantation remains an experimental procedure that requires the study and resolution of ethical, technical, financial, and social issues, all very important.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.007 |
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".