ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025
PGT-A: what's it for, what's wrong?
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- One Embryology: impactful connections between human- and wildlife-assisted reproduction.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Review
- Metabolic imaging for gamete and embryo assessment through advanced microscopy technologies: a novel avenue for artificial intelligence?Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2026Review
- Considerations for the future of in vitro gametogenesis in fertility care.Nature biotechnology · 2026Article
- Optimizing family building in women of advanced reproductive age: a Faster-Fewer-and-Finished approach.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- Identifying a rare mechanism: double parallel trisomy rescue leading to combined segmental and whole-chromosome mosaicism in an IVF-derived embryo.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Review
- Risk of endometriosis progression in infertile women trying to conceive naturally or using IVF.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2025Review
- Rapid and minimally invasive preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) based on polar body and nanopore sequencing: a viable alternative to conventional trophectoderm-based PGT-A?Human reproduction open · 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
PGT-A, what's it for? Considering the increase in fetal aneuploidies with a woman's age and the high number of miscarriages associated with fetal karyotype anomalies, the concept of selecting IVF embryos based on their karyotype in order to transfer only euploid embryos and eliminate aneuploid ones was proposed. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) was then established, nearly 30 years ago, with the expectation that the transfer of euploid embryos would lead to a significant improvement in medically assisted reproduction (MAR) outcomes. PGT-A, what's wrong? Despite the practice and widespread use, PGT-A has not consistently proven its effectiveness. The clinical value of PGT-A remains controversial. The initial studies reported an increase in MAR outcomes. However, these studies used embryo transfer as the reference point. More recent studies, which use intention-to-treat as the reference point, show, at best, slight improvements and, at worst, a reduction in the considered IVF outcomes. In this article, we attempt to answer two key questions: "What is it for?" and "What's wrong with PGT-A?". We also explore some of the ethical issues raised by these conclusions. Ultimately, we suggest that PGT-A should no longer be offered to infertile couples.
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.