ArticleF1000 biology reports2012
Advances in embryo selection methods.
Article in F1000 biology reports, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Methodological and Ethical Considerations in the Use of Chordate Embryos in Biomedical Research.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Exogenous L-Glutathione Improves Vitrification Outcomes in Murine Preimplantation Embryos.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The global gene expression outline of the bovine blastocyst: reflector of environmental conditions and predictor of developmental capacity.BMC genomics · 2021Article
- Pre-implantation developmental potential from in vivo and in vitro matured mouse oocytes: a cytoskeletal perspective on oocyte quality.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2015Article
- Developmental capacity and pregnancy rate of tetrahedral- versus non-tetrahedral-shaped 4-cell stage human embryos.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2014Observational
- Preimplantation genetic screening: a practical guide.Clinical medicine insights. Reproductive health · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite many recent advances in the field of reproductive biology and medicine, the efficiency of in vitro fertilization procedures remains relatively low. There is a need for a reliable and non-invasive method of embryo selection to ensure that only embryos with the highest developmental potential are chosen for transfer to mothers-to-be. Here, we compare various methods currently used for assessing embryonic viability, such as examination of embryonic morphology, quality of the genetic material, or metabolism. Additionally, we discuss novel procedures for embryonic assessment based on advanced time-lapse imaging techniques, which show great promise and may lead to increased in vitro fertilization efficiencies.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.