MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416157744 · doi:10.1177/03000605251394136

Fibrinogen and cytokines as biomarkers of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatment: A prospective cohort study

2025· article· en· W4416157744 on OpenAlexaff
Herbert Ekoe Dankluvi, Enoch Odame Anto, Benedict Sackey, Ebenezer Senu, Elikplim Adzo Damalie, Millicent Osaah, Ellis Fleischer Djoleto, Edward T. Dassah, Charles Mawunyo Senaya, Francis Jojo Moses Kodzo Damalie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Medical Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian function and disorders
Canadian institutionsOttawa Fertility Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvarian hyperstimulation syndromeProspective cohort studyAssisted reproductive technologyCohortFibrinogenCohort studyControlled ovarian hyperstimulationVenous blood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is the most severe and life-threatening iatrogenic complication of ovulation induction during assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedures. However, the pathogenesis is not yet fully understood. In Ghana, there is a paucity of data on OHSS. For the first time, this study assessed fibrinogen and cytokines, including interleukin (IL)-8, Tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, and IL-10, before and after controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) among women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. Methods This prospective cohort study included 46 women who underwent IVF from April to November 2023 at Hallmark Medicals, Kumasi, Ghana. All participants received the standard treatment protocol for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) using the long gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog (GnRHa) protocol. A well-structured questionnaire was used to gather sociodemographic and clinical information. Approximately 10 ml of venous blood was collected for laboratory analyses of fibrinogen and cytokine markers as well as hepatic and renal function tests. Statistical analyses were performed in R Language 4.3.2 and SPSS 26.0. A p value < 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance. Results The incidence of OHSS among women who underwent controlled ovarian stimulation was 10.9%. It was more prevalent in younger patients aged 18–24 years (60.0%) (p > 0.05). There were no significant differences between OHSS subjects and non-OHSS subjects in terms of pre- and post-COS levels of fibrinogen, TNF-α, IL-8 or IL-10 (p > 0.05). Moreover, there were no significant differences between OHSS and non-OHSS subjects in terms of pre- and post-COS levels of liver and renal function markers (p > 0.05). At a cutoff of ≥ 33.5 ng/L, IL-10 was the best marker for detecting OHSS, with a sensitivity of 80.0%, specificity of 71.8%, and area under the curve of 63.3%. Conclusion The prevalence of OHSS among younger women who undergo controlled ovarian stimulation is high (10.9%). Controlled ovarian stimulation did not alter hepatic or renal function. IL-10 could serve as a diagnostic biomarker for detecting OHSS among women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation with high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.358 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of International Medical Research→Same topicOvarian function and disorders→French-language works237,207→