ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024
Personalized embryo transfer guided by rsERT with hourly precision improves pregnancy outcomes in patients with a receptive window of implantation: a pilot study.
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.
- The efficacy of RNA-seq-based endometrial receptivity test (rsERT) in guiding personalized embryo transfer in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome without recurrent implantation failure: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Trial
- Research progress on non-invasive testing of endometrial receptivity.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo investigate whether personalized embryo transfer (pET) predicted by a modified RNA-sequencing-based endometrial receptivity test (rsERT) model can improve intrauterine pregnancy rate (IPR) in patients with a receptive window of implantation (WOI).
designA retrospective pilot study was conducted in the Center for Reproductive Medicine, Central South University, from January 2018 to December 2023. A total of 524 patients with receptive WOI results from rsERT were assigned into two groups based on whether they underwent conventional embryo transfer (conventional ET) or pET. Patients in the conventional ET were matched with those in the pET group at a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching (PSM).
resultsBefore PSM, the IPR (55.73% vs. 46.19%, P = 0.032) and implantation rate (IR) (47.51% vs. 34.03%, P = 0.000) in the pET group were significantly higher than that in the conventional ET group. However, the number and types of transferred embryos differed significantly between the two groups. After adjusting for confounding factors, IPR (57.38% vs. 44.81, P = 0.016) and IR (46.81% vs. 33.10%, P = 0.001) remained significantly higher in the pET group compared to the conventional ET group. The implantation failure rate was significantly lower in the pET group compared to controls (42.62% vs. 55.19%, P = 0.016). Additionally, the multiple-pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the pET group compared to the conventional ET group (10.29% vs. 1.68%, P = 0.001).
conclusionsWomen with receptive WOI results could benefit from the receptivity-timed pET predicted by the newly refined rsERT. These findings provide a basis for future research in precision medicine for embryo transfer.
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.