ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025
"How did it go?"-investigation of physician's experience during embryo transfer and subsequent pregnancy outcomes.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Subjective versus objective contributions to embryo transfer outcomes.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis research sought to investigate if a physician's experience of an embryo transfer (ET) correlates to rates of success.
methodsA single experienced physician rated characteristics of ETs including ease of transfer (1-10), visibility (1-10), presence of blood, and amount of mucus (0-3) at the time of ET. Main outcomes were positive beta-human chorionic gonadotropin level 11 days post transfer and ongoing pregnancy rate.
resultsA total of 365 transfers were rated. The average age of patients was 34.2 + / - 4.6 years. A total of 69.6% of cycles were programmed, and 73.2% of the transferred embryos underwent pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-a) prior to transfer. Average ease of transfer scores (9.3 + / - 1.7 vs 9.2 + / - 1.7; p = 0.71) and visibility scores (8.3 + / - 2.3 vs 8.1 + / - 2.8; p = 0.37) were similar between positive and negative pregnancy tests, respectively. Blood and mucus did not influence pregnancy rates. There was no correlation between ease of mock and actual embryo transfers. Multivariate logistic regression for positive bHCG demonstrated a significant predictive value for PGT-a (OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.47-4.23). Ease of transfer (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88-1.15), visibility (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.94-1.15), mucus (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.77-1.30), and embryo age (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.92-1.03) were not predictive.
conclusionsIn experienced hands, physician subjective impressions of transfer characteristics were not significantly correlated with a successful transfer.
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.