Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40399312›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Deep learning classification integrating embryo images with associated clinical information from ART cycles.

Mohamed Salih, Christopher Austin, Krishna Mantravadi, Eva Seow, Sutthipat Jitanantawittaya, Sandeep Reddy, Beverley Vollenhoven, Hamid Rezatofighi, Fabrizzio Horta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Mohamed SalihDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, VIC, 3168, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0577-8802
Christopher AustinDept of Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Clayton, VIC , Australia.
Krishna MantravadiOasis Fertility, Hyderabad, India.
Eva SeowIVF Bridge Fertility Center, Johor, Malaysia.
Sutthipat JitanantawittayaIbaby Fertility, Bangkok, Thailand.
Sandeep ReddySchool of Medicine, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Beverley VollenhovenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, VIC, 3168, Australia.
Hamid RezatofighiDept of Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Clayton, VIC , Australia.
Fabrizzio HortaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, VIC, 3168, Australia. fabrizzio.horta@unsw.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3212-4924

Funding

Monash Data Future Institute MDFI-2021-12
6 · The paper itself

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

BlastocystDeep LearningImage Processing, Computer-AssistedReproductive Techniques, AssistedAdultFemaleHumansMaleNeural Networks, ComputerPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeDeep learningEmbryologyEmbryo selectionInfertilityIVF/ICSI outcome

Identifiers

PMID40399312
PMCPMC12095659

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.