ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024
Does cleavage stage morphology increase the discriminatory power of prediction in blastocyst transfer outcome?
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Old and new" frontiers in embryo viability assessment: current practices and introduction of emerging approaches.Biology of reproduction · 2026Review
- The role of mitochondrial DNA copy number in spent culture medium in predicting outcomes of single blastocyst transfer.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Application of a methodological framework for the development and multicenter validation of reliable artificial intelligence in embryo evaluation.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2025Article
- To Assess or Not to Assess: Reconsidering Day 3 Embryo Quality in Planned Freeze-All Blastocyst Cycles.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the contribution of the cleavage stage morphological parameters to the prediction of blastocyst transfer outcomes.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted on 8383 single-blastocyst transfer cycles including 2246 fresh and 6137 vitrified-warmed cycles. XGboost, LASSO, and GLM algorithms were employed to establish models for assessing the predictive value of the cleavage stage morphological parameters in transfer outcomes. Four models were developed using each algorithm: all-in model with or without day 3 morphology and embryo quality-only model with or without day 3 morphology.
resultsThe live birth rate was 48.04% in the overall cohort. The AUCs of the models with the algorithm of XGboost were 0.83, 0.82, 0.63, and 0.60; with LASSO were 0.66, 0.66, 0.61, and 0.60; and with GLM were 0.66, 0.66, 0.61, and 0.60 respectively. In models 1 and 2, female age, basal FSH, peak E2, endometrial thickness, and female BMI were the top five critical features for predicting live birth; In models 3 and 4, the most crucial factor was blastocyst formation on D5 rather than D6. In model 3, incorporating cleavage stage morphology, including early cleavage, D3 cell number, and fragmentation, was significantly associated with successful live birth. Additionally, the live birth rates for blastocysts derived from on-time, slow, and fast D3 embryos were 49.7%, 39.5%, and 52%, respectively.
conclusionsThe value of cleavage stage morphological parameters in predicting the live birth outcome of single blastocyst transfer is limited.
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.