Schackjuel3800

To find a cut-off ratio of estradiol/metaphase II oocyte (E2/M2) ratio and to evaluate the correlation with patients' characteristics, embryo morphokinetics using EmbryoScope™ and IVF cycle outcomes.

For this retrospective cohort study, records of all fresh cycles that were cultured and scored by EmbryoScope™ were evaluated. selleck compound The peak E2/M2 ratio was calculated on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration and correlated to embryo morphokinetic quality and cycle outcomes. A receiver operating characteristics analysis was calculated for the E2/M2 ratio and clinical pregnancy rates.

A total of 2461 oocytes were collected from 319 patients. Receiver operating characteristics analysis revealed a cutoff of 204 as a discriminative point to predict clinical pregnancy with a sensitivity of 69.5% and specificity of 62.1% (P < 0.001). E2/M2 > 204 group were older, had higher E2 concentration, fewer M2 oocytes despite elevated gonadotrophin doses. E2/M2 ratio ≤ 204 was correlated with higher fertilization rate, better embryo quality, higher pregnancy and live birth rates, and more frozen embryos.

E2/M2 ratio < 204 yielded the best probability to achieve good quality embryos with good morphokinetic scores and better pregnancy outcomes and may be used to predict IVF cycle outcomes. Advanced maternal age and low ovarian response received higher concentrations of gonadotrophins, which resulted in higher E2/M2 ratio. Milder stimulation to those patients may improve their cycle outcomes.

E2/M2 ratio less then 204 yielded the best probability to achieve good quality embryos with good morphokinetic scores and better pregnancy outcomes and may be used to predict IVF cycle outcomes. Advanced maternal age and low ovarian response received higher concentrations of gonadotrophins, which resulted in higher E2/M2 ratio. Milder stimulation to those patients may improve their cycle outcomes.

Bipolar disorder is a chronic, progressive illness characterized by recurrent episodes of mania and depression. Self-report scales have historically played a significant role in the monitoring of bipolar symptoms. However, these tools rely on episodic memory, which can be unreliable and do not allow the clinician to monitor brief episodic symptoms or the course of symptoms over shorter periods of time. Mobile app-based questionnaires have been suggested as a tool to improve monitoring of patients with bipolar disorder.

This paper aims to determine the feasibility and validity of mobile app-based self-report questionnaires.

We performed a systematic review of the literature according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The PubMed, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Ovid MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases were searched for papers published in English that assessed adherence to and the validity of mobile app-based self-report questionnaires. Relevant studies pubatients with bipolar disorder. Data collected using these tools appear to differ between patients with bipolar disorder and healthy controls and are significantly associated with other clinically important measures. It is unclear at this time whether these tools can be used to detect acute episodes of mania or depression in patients with bipolar disorder. Adherence data indicate that patients with bipolar disorder show good adherence to self-report assessments administered daily for the duration of the study periods evaluated.

Transitions in care are vulnerable periods in health care that can expose patients to preventable errors due to incomplete or delayed communication between health care providers. Transitioning critically ill patients from intensive care units (ICUs) to other patient care units (PCUs) is particularly risky, due to the high acuity of the patients and the diversity of health care providers involved in their care. Instituting structured documentation to standardize written communication between health care providers during transitions has been identified as a promising means to reduce communication breakdowns. We developed an evidence-informed, computer-enabled, ICU-specific structured tool-an electronic transfer (e-transfer) tool-to facilitate and standardize the composition of written transfer summaries in the ICUs of one Canadian city. The tool consisted of 10 primary sections with a user interface combination of structured, automated, and free-text fields.

Our overarching goal is to evaluate whether imple.gov NCT03590002; https//www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03590002.

DERR1-10.2196/18675.

DERR1-10.2196/18675.

Despite the rapidly growing number of digital assessment tools for screening and diagnosing mental health disorders, little is known about their diagnostic accuracy.

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to establish the diagnostic accuracy of question- and answer-based digital assessment tools for diagnosing a range of highly prevalent psychiatric conditions in the adult population.

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) will be used. The focus of the systematic review is guided by the population, intervention, comparator, and outcome framework (PICO). We will conduct a comprehensive systematic literature search of MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Library, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) for appropriate articles published from January 1, 2005. Two authors will independently screen the titles and abstracts of identified references and select studies according to the eligibility criteria. Any inconsistencies will be discussed and resolved. The two authors will then extract data into a standardized form. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool, and a descriptive analysis and meta-analysis will summarize the diagnostic accuracy of the identified digital assessment tools.

The systematic review and meta-analysis commenced in November 2020, with findings expected by May 2021.

This systematic review and meta-analysis will summarize the diagnostic accuracy of question- and answer-based digital assessment tools. It will identify implications for clinical practice, areas for improvement, and directions for future research.

PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020214724; https//www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020214724.

DERR1-10.2196/25382.

DERR1-10.2196/25382.