Oocyte Cryopreservation in Transgender and Gender-Diverse Individuals With or Without Prior Testosterone Use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate oocyte cryopreservation among transgender and gender-diverse adolescents and young adults with or without prior testosterone exposure, we performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients younger than age 35 years referred for oocyte cryopreservation through our formal fertility-preservation program from 2014 to 2023. The number of patients referred and pursuing fertility preservation increased over time. Among the 93 patients referred, 37 pursued oocyte cryopreservation (31 testosterone-naïve and six testosterone-exposed). Among the latter, neither length of time on testosterone before presentation nor duration off testosterone before retrieval (minimum 2 months) were associated with the number of mature oocytes frozen. When comparing testosterone-naïve with testosterone-exposed individuals, there was no difference in number of oocytes retrieved (median 28 vs 32, P =0.43) or mature oocytes frozen (21 vs 21, P =0.95).
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".