Re-analysis of aneuploidy blastocysts with an inner cell mass and different regional trophectoderm cells.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

1. No advantage of fresh blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfer in women under the age of 39: a randomized controlled study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2018
   Trial
2. Evaluating the application value of NGS-based PGT-A by screening cryopreserved MDA products of embryos from PGT-M cycles with known transfer outcomes.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Re-analysis of aneuploidy blastocysts with an inner cell mass and different regional trophectoderm cells.2017

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as