ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024
Best quality vs. sex selection - an analysis of embryo selection preferences for patients undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy over a 10-year period.
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. 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.
- In vitro fertilization outcomes in previously cured tuberculosis patients: a retrospective study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Article
- The Use of Stem Cells in Assisted Reproduction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeInvestigate patient preferences in embryo selection for transfer regarding quality versus sex in IVF/ICSI cycles with PGT-A and assess associated clinical implications.
methodsRetrospective cohort study at a university fertility practice from January 2012 to December 2021. Included were patients undergoing single frozen euploid transfers with at least one embryo of each sex available. Primary outcomes were preference for embryo selection (quality vs. sex) and sex preference (male vs. female). Trends over 10 years were evaluated and clinical outcomes, including clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), sustained implantation rate (SIR), and live birth rate (LBR), were compared.
resultsA total of 5,145 embryo transfer cycles were included; 54.5% chose the best-quality embryo, while 45.5% selected based on sex. Among those choosing based on sex, 56.5% chose male embryos and 43.5% chose female. Preference for quality remained consistent over the decade (p = 0.30), while male embryos were consistently favored (p = 0.64). Best-quality embryos had higher grades (p < 0.001). Clinical outcomes were similar between groups (CPR: 74.4% vs. 71.9%, p = 0.05; SIR: 64.9% vs. 63.4%, p = 0.26; LBR: 58.8% vs. 56.7%, p = 0.13), and between male and female embryo selections.
conclusionsSex selection remains common, with 45.5% selecting embryos based on sex, predominantly favoring males. This trend persisted over 10 years, with comparable clinical outcomes regardless of selection criteria.
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.