ArticlePeerJ2022
Comparison of frozen-thawed embryo transfer strategies for the treatment of infertility in young women: a retrospective study.
Article in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of a machine learning-based model for predicting live birth outcomes in patients undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Review
- Clinical outcomes of co-transfer of partially and fully compacted morula versus fully compacted morula alone on day 4.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- The impact of hCG trigger versus dual trigger on reproductive outcomes in elderly infertile women: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Comparison of pregnancy outcomes among patients of different ages who underwent frozen-thawed high-quality single blastocyst transfer.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Article
- Comparison of frozen-thaw blastocyst transfer strategies in women aged 35-40 years: a retrospective study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate transfer strategies in the frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycle. Methods: The clinical data of 1,652 FET patients were divided into five groups according to the number and quality of the transferred blastocyst: high-quality single blastocyst group (group A, Results: Group A had the highest embryo implantation rate (67.38%), significantly different from the implantation rates of the other four groups. The gemellary pregnancy rate (1.60%), preterm birth rate (5.58%), neonatal birth weight (3,350g [3,000g, 3,650g]), neonatal birth age (39.57 weeks [38.71, 40.34]), and incidence of low birth weight (7.02%) in group A were different from those in groups B, C, and D, but did not significantly differ from those in group E. Moreover, the proportions of male infants born in groups A (56.86%) and D (59.41%) were significantly higher than those in the other three groups. Double blastocyst transfer (0.528, 95% CI [0.410-0.680], Conclusion: The live birth rate of frozen-thawed high-quality single blastocyst transfer is lower than that of double high-quality blastocyst transfer, which can significantly increase the embryo implantation rate. High-quality single blastocyst transfer also significantly lowers the risk of gemellary pregnancy, preterm birth, and low birth weight, and can significantly improve maternal and infant outcomes. After weighing the pros and cons of live birth with pregnancy and neonatal complications, the authors believe that high-quality single blastocyst transfer is the optimal FET strategy for young women and is worthy of further clinical application. Despite this recommendation, high-quality single blastocyst transfer can increase the risk of monozygotic twins, as well as significantly increase the proportion of male infants born.
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.