ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2016
Do morphokinetic data sets inform pregnancy potential?
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 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- A New Method of Assessing Endometrial Compaction as an Indicator of Endometrial Receptivity for Predicting Reproductive Success.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Could cleaved embryo morphology and morphokinetics be associated with prenatal and neonatal outcomes?Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Faster Fertilization and Cleavage Kinetics Reflect Competence to Achieve a Live Birth: Data from Single-Embryo Transfer Cycles.BioMed research international · 2022Article
- Observational
- Can novel early non-invasive biomarkers of embryo quality be identified with time-lapse imaging to predict live birth?Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2019Article
- Deep learning as a predictive tool for fetal heart pregnancy following time-lapse incubation and blastocyst transfer.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2019Article
- A comparison of morphokinetic markers predicting blastocyst formation and implantation potential from two large clinical data sets.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2019Article
- Are computational applications the "crystal ball" in the IVF laboratory? The evolution from mathematics to artificial intelligence.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2018Review
- A prospective randomized comparison of early embryo cleavage kinetics between two media culture systems.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
- Shallow artificial networks with morphokinetic time-lapse parameters coupled to ART data allow to predict live birth.Reproductive medicine and biologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to create a model to predict the implantation of transferred embryos based on information contained in the morphokinetic parameters of time-lapse monitoring.
methodsAn analysis of time-lapse recordings of 410 embryos transferred in 343 cycles of in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment was performed. The study was conducted between June 2012 and November 2014. For each embryo, the following data were collected: the duration of time from the intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) procedure to further division for two, three, four, and five blastomeres, time intervals between successive divisions, and the level of fragmentation assessed in successive time-points. Principal component analysis (PCA) and logistic regression were used to create a predictive model.
resultsBased on the results of principal component analysis and logistic regression analysis, a predictive equation was constructed. Statistically significant differences (p < 0.001) in the size of the created parameter between the implanted group (the median value: Me = -5.18 and quartiles: Q 1= -5.61; Q 3 = -4.79) and the non-implanted group (Me = -5.69, Q 1 = -6.34; Q 3 = -5.16) were found. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve constructed for the considered model showed the good quality of this predictive equation. The area under the ROC curve was AUC = 0.70 with a 95% confidence interval (0.64, 0.75). The presented model has been validated on an independent data set, illustrating that the model is reliable and repeatable.
conclusionsMorphokinetic parameters contain information useful in the process of creating pregnancy prediction models. However, embryo quality is not the only factor responsible for implantation, and, thus, the power of prediction of the considered model is not as high as in models for blastocyst formation. Nevertheless, as illustrated by the results of this study, the application of advanced data-mining methods in reproductive medicine allows one to create more accurate and useful models.
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.