ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2022
Monozygotic twin rate among ART centers: a multicenter analysis of data from 18 Italian units.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors of time and genetics influencing the rate of monozygotic twinning following ART.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2025Article
- Lab partners: oocytes, embryos and company. A personal view on aspects of oocyte maturation and the development of monozygotic twins.Animal reproduction · 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
18 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe risk of monozygotic twins (MZTs) is increased in couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatments. Several systematic reviews have investigated the possible determinants linked to ART, but results obtained have not been conclusive. The study aims to investigate whether the incidence of MZT differed among ART centers.
methodsThis is a multicenter retrospective cohort study using the Italian ART National Registry database and involving the centers reporting data from individual ART cycles from 2015 to 2019. To investigate the incidence of MZT, only single embryo transfer cycles were considered. Women who had sex-discordant deliveries were excluded. MZT rate was calculated as the number of multiple pregnancies (more than one gestational sac at first ultrasound) out of the total number of clinical pregnancies. A binomial distribution model was used to determine the 95% CI of the frequency of MZT.
resultsEighteen centers were included, and they provided data on 10,433 pregnancies. The total number of MZT was 162, corresponding to an incidence of 1.5% (95% CI: 1.3-1.8%). The rate of MZT among centers varied between 0% (95% CI: 0.0-25.9%) and 3.2% (95% CI: 1.3-8.1%). All the 95% CIs included 1.5%, rejecting the hypothesis that the MZT rate may significantly differ among centers.
conclusionsThe rate of MZT did not significantly vary among ART centers. Local factors are unlikely to explain the increased rate of MZT in ART pregnancies.
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.