MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365810233 · doi:10.15406/ogij.2023.14.00696

Effects of uterine polyps on embryo implantation in IVF cycles

2023· article· en· W4365810233 on OpenAlexaff
Murid Javed, Noura K Alfhead, Sameera Shaheen, Khaleel Al Yahya

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics & Gynecology International Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGynecological conditions and treatments
Canadian institutionsCReATe Fertility Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndometrial PolypInfertilityMedicineEndometriumGynecologyUterine cavityEndometrial biopsyAssisted reproductive technologyFemale infertilityIn vitro fertilisationEmbryo transferObstetricsUterusEmbryoPregnancyBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embryo implantation requires healthy uterine endometrium for natural or assisted reproductive technology conception. However, in presence of any endometrial anatomical abnormality or disease, implantation is affected. Uterine or endometrial polyps are over growths of endometrial cells that extend into the uterine cavity. They are usually noncancerous. There can be one or many polyps. They range in size from a few millimeters to several centimeters or larger. They may cause vaginal bleeding in between periods, heavy periods, frequent or unpredictable periods and infertility. The objective of this study was to find out effects of endometrial polyps on embryo implantation in assisted reproductive technology cycles of Saudi women being treated at an infertility clinic. This was a case-control study. The participants were in ratio of 5:1 i.e., for every 5 patients there was one control. The polyp diagnosis was carried out with ultrasound and endometrial biopsy. We observed high incidence of implantation failure in patients with uterine polyps as compared to that in the control patients. The results of this study indicated that the presence of endometrial polyps is a risk factor for infertility and failure of conception after in vitro fertilization.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics & Gynecology International JournalSame topicGynecological conditions and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207