ArticleScientific reports2024
Advanced KPI framework for IVF pregnancy prediction models in IVF protocols.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning-enabled prediction of ART pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Multi-modal Artificial Intelligence of Embryo Grading and Pregnancy Prediction in Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Review.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Review
- Development and external validation of a three-stage model to predict live birth after fresh IVF/ICSI embryo transfer.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Routine IVF Practice.Biology · 2025Review
- Personal KPIs in IVF Laboratory: Are They Measurable or Distortable? A Case Study Using AI-Based Benchmarking.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The utilization of neural networks in assisted reproductive technology is essential due to their ability to process complex and multidimensional data inherent in IVF procedures, offering opportunities for clinical outcome prediction, personalized treatment implementation, and overall advancement in fertility treatment. The aim of this study was to develop a novel approach to IVF laboratory data analysis, employing deep neural networks to predict the likelihood of clinical pregnancy occurrence within an individual treatment cycle, integrating both key performance indicators and clinical data. We conducted a retrospective analysis spanning 11 years, encompassing 8732 treatment cycles, to extract the most relevant features to our goal and train the model. Internal validation was performed on 1600 preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy embryo transfers, while external was conducted across two independent clinics (over 10,000 cases). Leveraging recurrent neural networks, our model demonstrates high accuracy in predicting the likelihood of clinical pregnancy within specific IVF treatment cycles (AUC = 0.68-0.86; test accuracy = 0.78, F1 score = 0.71, sensitivity = 0.62; specificity = 0.86) comparable to time-lapse system but with a simpler approach. Our model facilitates both retrospective analysis of outcomes and prospective evaluation of clinical pregnancy chances, thus presenting a promising avenue for quality management programs and promotes their realization in medical centers.
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.