ReviewJournal of education and health promotion2025
Machine learning in predicting infertility treatment success: A systematic literature review of techniques.
Review in Journal of education and health promotion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Determinants of modern family planning use among married adolescents in Bangladesh: evidence from a machine learning approach.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Assisted Reproductive Technology: Bridging Prediction and Clinical Judgment.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Prediction of polycystic ovary syndrome using machine learning models: Addressing class imbalance and high dimensionality.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
- Temporal Trends and Machine Learning-Based Risk Prediction of Female Infertility: A Cross-Cohort Analysis Using NHANES Data (2015-2023).Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Assisted reproductive technology (ART) is one of the major developments that has had a significant impact on infertility treatment. A predictive model of ART success based on machine learning (ML) techniques can provide a robust basis for estimating treatment success. This study aimed to identify predictive models of ART success and their determinants. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase. Data extraction involved collecting data in studies on dataset characteristics, ML techniques, and predictive model performance indicators. The search resulted in 3655 records, of which 27 papers were selected for analysis. ML publications in ART prediction have been in the past 5 years. In general, 107 various features were reported in all reviewed studies. Female age was the most common feature used in all identified studies. Most studies (96.3%) applied a supervised approach to develop predictive models. Among all, support vector machine (SVM) was the most frequently applied technique (44.44%). Nineteen different indicators have been used in studies to evaluate the model performance. 74.07% of the reviewed papers reported area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) as their performance indicator. Accuracy (55.55%), sensitivity (40.74%), and specificity (25.92%) were also commonly reported. ML has the potential to bring hope to infertile couples and to facilitate making challenging decisions. Considering relevant contributing factors and ML techniques is critical for reliable predictive modeling.
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.