ArticleReproductive biomedicine online2020
The prevalence, promotion and pricing of three IVF add-ons on fertility clinic websites.
Article in Reproductive biomedicine online, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recommendations from the WHO guideline for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infertility†.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2026Guideline
- A multicentre double-blinded randomized controlled trial on the efficacy of laser-assisted hatching in patients with repeated implantation failure undergoing IVF or ICSI.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2023Trial
- Commercial Impacts on Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Scoping Review.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Safeguarding WHO guideline recommendations through strengthened scientific integrity to advance global health.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of time-lapse monitoring with or without the use of embryo selection software compared to routine incubation and selection.Human reproduction open · 2026Article
- Add-On Technologies That Aim to Improve Oocyte Quality and Embryo Implantation Potential.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Let 'Pregnant Women Choose the Destiny for Themselves and Their Child'. How Fertility Clinic Digital Platforms Frame Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) in Spain.Sociology of health & illness · 2025Article
- Policy solutions to improve access to fertility treatment and optimise patient care: consensus from an expert forum.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Review
- The inconvenient reality of AI-assisted embryo selection in IVF.Nature medicine · 2024Article
- Applying a simplified economic evaluation approach to evaluate infertility treatments in clinical practice.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Review
- Survey ofFrontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Good practice recommendations on add-ons in reproductive medicine†.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- "It all depends on why it's red": qualitative interviews exploring patient and professional views of a traffic light system for IVF add-ons.Reproduction & fertility · 2023Article
- Patient informed choice in the age of evidence-based medicine: IVF patients' approaches to biomedical evidence and fertility treatment add-ons.Sociology of health & illness · 2023Article
- Ethics and IVF add-ons: We need to talk about it.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2022Article
- Development of a predictive model for luteal phase oocyte retrieval in poor responders undergoing natural cycle IVF.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Reporting on the Value of Artificial Intelligence in Predicting the Optimal Embryo for Transfer: A Systematic Review including Data Synthesis.Biomedicines · 2022Review
- Revisiting selected ethical aspects of current clinical in vitro fertilization (IVF) practice.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022Review
- The crafting of hope: Contextualising add-ons in the treatment trajectories of IVF patients.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
research questionHow are IVF clinic websites advertising three common IVF add-ons: assisted hatching, time-lapse embryo imaging and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A)?
designThe Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority 'Choose a fertility clinic' website service was used to identify IVF clinics and their websites. Assisted hatching, time-lapse embryo imaging and PGT-A were examined to determine which websites advertised them, what price they charged and what claims they made in relation to the add-ons.
resultsEighty-seven eligible clinics were identified, with 72 unique websites; 37 (43%) clinics were part of one of nine groups of IVF clinics, of sizes ranging from two to eight clinics in the UK. Time-lapse imaging (TLI) was the most frequently advertised of the three add-ons (67% of clinics), followed by PGT-A (47%) and assisted hatching (28%). Very few websites stated that the effectiveness of the add-on was in doubt or unclear (four, two and one websites for TLI, PGT-A and assisted hatching, respectively), and none raised the possibility that an add-on might have negative effects. Claims of efficacy were often based on upstream outcomes (e.g. implantation, pregnancy). Some claims that PGT-A and TLI improved live birth rates were found. There was substantial variation in pricing.
conclusionsIVF clinic websites provide valuable information for patients seeking fertility treatment so it is key that the information is accurate and complete. There is a need for transparent information on interventions, including uncertainties and risks, to be made available by IVF clinics to support well-informed treatment decisions. The selected add-ons are widely advertised, and there is wide variation in pricing.
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.