ArticleScientific reports2022
Internal validation and comparison of predictive models to determine success rate of infertility treatments: a retrospective study of 2485 cycles.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fertility Preservation and Assisted Reproduction Among Athletes: An Online Survey.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Application of Machine Learning Algorithms for Evaluating Predictors and Developing Diagnostic Models for Female Infertility Classification.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Observational
- Machine learning prediction of live birth after IVF using the morphological uterus sonographic assessment group features of adenomyosis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A retrospective cohort study: predictive nomogram for clinical pregnancy outcomes after intrauterine insemination.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Machine learning-based preliminary screening tool for clinical pregnancy prediction: towards management of IVF/ICSI stages.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- The use of artificial intelligence in sexual and reproductive health: a comprehensive scoping review.npj women's health · 2025Article
- Machine learning in predicting infertility treatment success: A systematic literature review of techniques.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence, Clinical Decision Support Algorithms, Mathematical Models, Calculators Applications in Infertility: Systematic Review and Hands-On Digital Applications.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2024Review
- Development of a machine learning-based prediction model for clinical pregnancy of intrauterine insemination in a large Chinese population.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Patient-Centric In Vitro Fertilization Prognostic Counseling Using Machine Learning for the Pragmatist.Seminars in reproductive medicine · 2024Review
- Testing the generalizability and effectiveness of deep learning models among clinics: sperm detection as a pilot study.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2024Article
- Comparative study of machine learning approaches integrated with genetic algorithm for IVF success prediction.PloS one · 2024Article
- Metabolomics Integration in Assisted Reproductive Technologies for Enhanced Embryo Selection beyond Morphokinetic Analysis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- A hybrid feature selection algorithm to determine effective factors in predictive model of success rate for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment: A cross-sectional study.International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2023Article
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 at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Infertility is a significant health problem and assisted reproductive technologies to treat infertility. Despite all efforts, the success rate of these methods is still low. Also, each of these methods has side effects and costs. Therefore, accurate prediction of treatment success rate is a clinical challenge. This retrospective study aimed to internally validate and compare various machine learning models for predicting the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) of infertility treatment. For this purpose, data from 1931 patients consisting of in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intra cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) (733) and intra uterine insemination (IUI) (1196) treatments were included. Also, no egg or sperm donation data were used. The performance of machine learning algorithms to predict clinical pregnancy were expressed in terms of accuracy, recall, F-score, positive predictive value (PPV), brier score (BS), Matthew correlation coefficient (MCC), and receiver operating characteristic. The significance of the features with CPR and AUCs was evaluated by Student's t test and DeLong's algorithm. Random forest (RF) model had the highest accuracy in the IVF/ICSI treatment. The sensitivity, F1 score, PPV, and MCC of the RF model were 0.76, 0.73, 0.80, and 0.5, respectively. These values for IUI treatment were 0.84, 0.80, 0.82, and 0.34, respectively. The BS was 0.13 and 0.15 for IVF/ICS and IUI, respectively. In addition, the estimated AUCs of the RF model for IVF/ICS and IUI were 0.73 and 0.7, respectively. Some essential features were obtained based on RF ranking for the two datasets, including age, follicle stimulation hormone, endometrial thickness, and infertility duration. The results showed a strong relationship between clinical pregnancy and a woman's age. Also, endometrial thickness and the number of follicles decreased with increasing female age in both treatments.
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.