ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2016
Does reducing gamete co-incubation time improve clinical outcomes: a retrospective study.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short-term vs. overnight insemination: which one is better for patients with only one or two oocytes retrieved in IVF cycles?Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Relationship of the levels of reactive oxygen species in the fertilization medium with the outcome ofFrontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Opportunities and Limits of Conventional IVF versus ICSI: It Is Time to Come off the Fence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- A new method to rescue embryos contaminated by bacteria.F&S reports · 2022Article
- Brief co-incubation of gametes benefits the outcomes of newborns.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this retrospective study was to determine whether patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) benefit from reducing the gamete co-incubation time.
methodsPatients (n = 570) were enrolled, including 281 patients in the reduced incubation time group (2-h incubation) and 289 patients in the standard IVF group (18-h incubation).
resultsThe observed outcomes, including the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), implantation rate (IR), live birth rate (LBR), and miscarriage rate (MR), were similar between the two groups. When the data were divided into two subgroups based on the maternal age (≤30 and >30 years), the rates of top-quality embryos (30.83 vs. 25.89 %; p = 0.028), CPR (66.67 vs. 42.11 %; p = 0.013), and IR (41.90 vs. 31.25 %, p = 0.019) of the 2-h incubation group were significantly higher in the younger subgroup. However, for older patients, only a lower MR (7.59 vs. 20.83 %; p = 0.019) was achieved. Reducing the time of incubation still improved the CPR (OR = 1.993, 95 % CI 1.141-3.480) and MR (OR = 3.173, 95 % CI 1.013-9.936) in the younger and older subgroups, respectively, after it was adjusted for potential confounders.
conclusionsReducing incubation time improves the clinical results of IVF, although the LBR is not statistically different between the 2- and 18-h incubation time groups. And the specific clinical outcomes of reducing incubation time varied between the >30-year-old and the ≤30-year-old.
Indexed as
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.