MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The relationship between serum estradiol and progesterone levels one day before frozen embryo transfer and pregnancy rates in artificially prepared frozen embryo cycles: are there any threshold serum hormone levels to predict pregnancy in luteal support by the vaginal and subcutaneous route combined?

2025· article· en· W4413111060 on OpenAlexaff
Levent Dikbaş, Michael H. Dahan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Turkish-German Gynecological Association · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbryo transferPregnancyLuteal phaseReceiver operating characteristicMedicinePercentileBody mass indexLogistic regressionSex hormone-binding globulinAndrologyGynecologyHormoneObstetricsEndocrinologyInternal medicineBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: . Material and Methods: levels on the day before FET in 167 cases prepared with hormone replacement therapy between February 2022 and October 2023. The primary outcomes assessed were the pregnancy and live birth rates. We modeled a cut-off serum value based on luteal support for pregnancy. Luteal support was through a combination of vaginal suppositories and subcutaneous injections. Multivariate logistic regression was used to test relationships between pregnancy outcomes and independent variables. Cut-off values were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and percentile analysis. Results: levels conceived (range 10.0-15.6 ng/mL). When multivariate logistic regression was used, this finding lost significance suggesting that low serum levels are related to age, BMI, and/or other factors. Conclusion: is used for programmed FET. Although this finding may be due to the confounding effects of age, BMI, and other factors affecting steroid metabolism, when controlled for in the multivariate logistic regression.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Turkish-German Gynecological AssociationSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207