ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2022
Using artificial intelligence to avoid human error in identifying embryos: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Deep learning applications for human embryo assessment using time-lapse imaging: scoping review.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Pooled it
- Construction and validation of a preimplantation kinship identification model using ultra-low-depth whole genome sequencing.iScience · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: An Updated Systematic Review of Their Role in Obstetrics and Midwifery.Cureus · 2025Review
- WISE: whole-scenario embryo identification using self-supervised learning encoder in IVF.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Translational Bioinformatics for Human Reproductive Biology Research: Examples, Opportunities and Challenges for a Future Reproductive Medicine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo determine whether convolutional neural networks (CNN) can be used to accurately ascertain the patient identity (ID) of cleavage and blastocyst stage embryos based on image data alone.
methodsA CNN model was trained and validated over three replicates on a retrospective cohort of 4889 time-lapse embryo images. The algorithm processed embryo images for each patient and produced a unique identification key that was associated with the patient ID at a timepoint on day 3 (~ 65 hours post-insemination (hpi)) and day 5 (~ 105 hpi) forming our data library. When the algorithm evaluated embryos at a later timepoint on day 3 (~ 70 hpi) and day 5 (~ 110 hpi), it generates another key that was matched with the patient's unique key available in the library. This approach was tested using 400 patient embryo cohorts on day 3 and day 5 and number of correct embryo identifications with the CNN algorithm was measured.
resultsCNN technology matched the patient identification within random pools of 8 patient embryo cohorts on day 3 with 100% accuracy (n = 400 patients; 3 replicates). For day 5 embryo cohorts, the accuracy within random pools of 8 patients was 100% (n = 400 patients; 3 replicates).
conclusionsThis study describes an artificial intelligence-based approach for embryo identification. This technology offers a robust witnessing step based on unique morphological features of each embryo. This technology can be integrated with existing imaging systems and laboratory protocols to improve specimen tracking.
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.