MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387683066 · doi:10.1071/rd23120

Looking back at five decades of embryo technology in practice

2023· article· en· W4387683066 on OpenAlexaff
J.F. Hasler

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsVétoquinol (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbryoEmbryo transferBiologyCryopreservationGeneticsBiotechnologyAndrologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper covers developments from International Embryo Technology Society (IETS) meetings over the past 50years. The IETS was officially 'born' at a meeting in Denver, Colorado on Sunday 26 May 1974. There have been 51 IETS meetings (the first was in May 1974), and the first conference at which papers were presented was in 1975. The name of the IETS was changed from International Embryo Transfer Society to International Embryo Technology Society in 2016. The annual IETS conferences are held once a year in January. Embryo technology advanced from the laborious and slow techniques of surgical recovery and transfer of bovine embryos to non-surgical recovery and transfer in many species. Cryopreservation of embryos was initially a slow process that met with only moderate technical success before the development of technology that resulted in high embryo survival rates. The polymerase chain reaction was used to determine the sex of embryos following laminar flow cytology, which came into use to separate X- and Y-bearing spermatozoa. IVF has grown to become widely used, and several factors make it more useful than superovulation and embryo recovery/transfer. Perhaps the most important tool of all was the system that allowed the genetic 'mapping' of the genomic sequence of Bos taurus cattle. Charting key DNA differences by scientists, 'haplotypes' are now used routinely to identify animals with desirable traits of economic importance, discover new genetic disorders, and track carrier status of genotyped animals. Future technology is discussed.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.006

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207