ArticleFertility and sterility2016
Factors associated with the use of elective single-embryo transfer and pregnancy outcomes in the United States, 2004-2012.
Article in Fertility and sterility, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Genetics and Reproductive Health Outcomes: Asian Perspective.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2024Pooled it
- Role of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) in Unexplained Infertility Management: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Predicted probabilities of live birth following assisted reproductive technology using United States national surveillance data from 2016 to 2018.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Article
- Association of State Insurance Mandates for Fertility Treatment With Multiple Embryo Transfer After Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Impact of in vitro fertilization state mandates for third party insurance coverage in the United States: a review and critical assessment.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2022Review
- Perinatal outcomes of singleton live births after late moderate-to-severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: A propensity score-matched study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
- Preimplantation genetic testing and chances of a healthy live birth amongst recipients of fresh donor oocytes in the United States.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2020Article
- Article
- The Canadian Assisted Reproductive Technologies Register (CARTR) Plus database: a validation study.Human reproduction open · 2020Article
- Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2016.Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Surveillance summaries (Washington, D.C. : 2002) · 2019Article
- Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2015.Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Surveillance summaries (Washington, D.C. : 2002) · 2018Article
- Elective single blastocyst transfer in advanced maternal age.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2017Article
- Differences in pregnancy outcomes in donor egg frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles following preimplantation genetic screening (PGS): a single center retrospective study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2017Article
- [Pregnancy and obstetric outcomes of elective single versus double cleavage-stage embryo transfer].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate factors associated with elective single-embryo transfer (eSET) utilization and its effect on assisted reproductive technology outcomes in the United States.
designHistorical cohort.
settingNot applicable. PATIENT(S): Fresh IVF cycles of women aged 18-37 years using autologous oocytes with either one (SET) or two (double-embryo transfer [DET]) embryos transferred and reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System between 2004 and 2012. Cycles were categorized into four groups with ([+]) or without ([-]) supernumerary embryos cryopreserved. The SET group with embryos cryopreserved was designated as eSET. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURE(S): The likelihood of eSET utilization, live birth, and singleton non-low birth weight term live birth, modeled using logistic regression. Presented as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULT(S): The study included 263,375 cycles (21,917 SET[-]cryopreservation, 20,996 SET[+]cryopreservation, 103,371 DET[-]cryopreservation, and 117,091 DET[+]cryopreservation). The utilization of eSET (SET[+]cryopreservation) increased from 1.8% in 2004 to 14.9% in 2012 (aOR 7.66, 95% CI 6.87-8.53) and was more likely with assisted reproductive technology insurance coverage (aOR 1.60, 95% CI 1.54-1.66), Asian race (aOR 1.26, 95% CI 1.20-1.33), uterine factor diagnosis (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.37-1.59), retrieval of ≥16 oocytes (aOR 2.85, 95% CI 2.55-3.19), and the transfer of day 5-6 embryos (aOR 4.23, 95% CI 4.06-4.40); eSET was less likely in women aged 35-37 years (aOR 0.76, 95% CI 0.73-0.80). Compared with DET cycles, the likelihood of the ideal outcome, term non-low birth weight singleton live birth, was increased 45%-52% with eSET. CONCLUSION(S): Expanding insurance coverage for IVF would facilitate the broader use of eSET and may reduce the morbidity and healthcare costs associated with multiple pregnancies.
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.