ArticleScientific reports2025
Deep learning classification integrating embryo images with associated clinical information from ART cycles.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metabolic imaging for gamete and embryo assessment through advanced microscopy technologies: a novel avenue for artificial intelligence?Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2026Review
- A robust clinical-laboratory AI model for predicting cumulative live birth per oocyte retrieval as a benchmark for evaluating emerging embryo selection technologies.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2026Article
- Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Assisted Reproductive Technology: Bridging Prediction and Clinical Judgment.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Machine learning-based endometrial ultrasound radiomics habitat analysis for predicting pregnancy outcomes after embryo transfer.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Article
- Pregnancy AI: Development and Internal Validation of an Artificial Intelligence Tool to Predict Live Births in ICSI and IVF Cycles Using Clinical Features and Embryo Images.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Advancing IVF outcomes: AI-powered endometrial synchronizers to enhance implantation success.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Investigating discrepancies in accuracy, agreement and interpretability for single-frame embryo classification tasks conducted by embryologists and deep learning models.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- Breaking barriers in male infertility: the power of artificial intelligence-driven solutions.Frontiers in urology · 2026Review
- Machine learning-based preliminary screening tool for clinical pregnancy prediction: towards management of IVF/ICSI stages.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- From the Understanding of Maternal Molecules and Mechanisms to Predicting Embryonic Development.Reproductive medicine and biologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An advanced Artificial Intelligence (AI) model that leverages cutting-edge computer vision techniques to analyse embryo images and clinical data, enabling accurate prediction of clinical pregnancy outcomes in single embryo transfer procedures. Three AI models were developed, trained, and tested using a database comprised of a total of 1503 international treatment cycles (Thailand, Malaysia, and India): 1) A Clinical Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) for patient clinical data. 2) An Image Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) AI model using blastocyst images. 3) A fused model using a combination of both models. All three models were evaluated against their ability to predict clinical pregnancy and live birth. Each of the models were further assessed through a visualisation process where the importance of each data point clarified which clinical and embryonic features contributed the most to the prediction. The MLP model achieved a strong performance of 81.76% accuracy, 90% average precision and 0.91 AUC (Area Under the Curve). The CNN model achieved a performance of 66.89% accuracy, 74% average precision and 0.73 AUC. The Fusion model achieved 82.42% accuracy, 91% average precision and 0.91 AUC. From the visualisation process we found that female and male age to be the most clinical factors, whilst Trophectoderm to be the most important blastocyst feature. There is a gap in performance between the Clinical and Images model, which is expected due to the difficulty in predicting clinical pregnancy from just the blastocyst images. However, the Fusion AI model made more informed predictions, achieving better performance than separate models alone. This study demonstrates that AI for IVF application can increase prediction performance by integrating blastocyst images with patient clinical information.
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.