Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32654105›Full record

ReviewJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2020

Artificial intelligence in the IVF laboratory: overview through the application of different types of algorithms for the classification of reproductive data.

Eleonora Inácio Fernandez, André Satoshi Ferreira, Matheus Henrique Miquelão Cecílio, Dóris Spinosa Chéles, Rebeca Colauto Milanezi de Souza, Marcelo Fábio Gouveia Nogueira, José Celso Rocha

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Noninvasive Biomarkers of Human Embryo Developmental Potential.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Eleonora Inácio FernandezLaboratory of Applied Mathematics, Department of Biological Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Campus Assis, Av. Dom Antônio, São Paulo, 2100, Brazil.
André Satoshi FerreiraLaboratory of Applied Mathematics, Department of Biological Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Campus Assis, Av. Dom Antônio, São Paulo, 2100, Brazil.
Matheus Henrique Miquelão CecílioLaboratory of Applied Mathematics, Department of Biological Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Campus Assis, Av. Dom Antônio, São Paulo, 2100, Brazil.
Dóris Spinosa ChélesLaboratory of Applied Mathematics, Department of Biological Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Campus Assis, Av. Dom Antônio, São Paulo, 2100, Brazil.
Rebeca Colauto Milanezi de SouzaLaboratory of Applied Mathematics, Department of Biological Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Campus Assis, Av. Dom Antônio, São Paulo, 2100, Brazil.
Marcelo Fábio Gouveia NogueiraLaboratory of Embryonic Micromanipulation, Department of Biological Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Campus Assis, Av. Dom Antônio, São Paulo, 2100, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2239-9652
José Celso RochaLaboratory of Applied Mathematics, Department of Biological Sciences, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Campus Assis, Av. Dom Antônio, São Paulo, 2100, Brazil. jose.celso@unesp.br.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0094-2634

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo # 2017/19323-5, 2018/24252-2 and 2018/19371-2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past years, the assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) have been accompanied by constant innovations. For instance, intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), time-lapse monitoring of the embryonic morphokinetics, and PGS are innovative techniques that increased the success of the ART. In the same trend, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) techniques is being intensively researched whether in the embryo or spermatozoa selection. Despite several studies already published, the use of AI within assisted reproduction clinics is not yet a reality. This is largely due to the different AI techniques that are being proposed to be used in the daily routine of the clinics, which causes some uncertainty in their use. To shed light on this complex scenario, this review briefly describes some of the most frequently used AI algorithms, their functionalities, and their potential use. Several databases were analyzed in search of articles where applied artificial intelligence algorithms were used on reproductive data. Our focus was on the classification of embryonic cells and semen samples. Of a total of 124 articles analyzed, 32 were selected for this review. From the proposed algorithms, most have achieved a satisfactory precision, demonstrating the potential of a wide range of AI techniques. However, the evaluation of these studies suggests the need for more standardized research to validate the proposed models and their algorithms. Routine use of AI in assisted reproduction clinics is just a matter of time. However, the choice of AI technique to be used is supported by a better understanding of the principles subjacent to each technique, that is, its robustness, pros, and cons. We provide some current (although incipient) and potential uses of AI on the clinic routine, discussing how accurate and friendly it could be. Finally, we propose some standards for AI research on the selection of the embryo to be transferred and other future hints. For us, the imminence of its use is evident, providing a revolutionary milestone that will impact the ART.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceFemaleFertilization in VitroHumansMaleReproductionReproductive Techniques, AssistedSpermatozoaSperm Injections, IntracytoplasmicArtificial intelligenceAssisted reproductive technologiesDeep learningEmbryo classificationMultilayer perceptronPrediction models

Identifiers

PMID32654105
PMCPMC7550511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.