ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
Adjusting key performance indicators in ART laboratories according to controlled ovarian stimulation protocol.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Reliable key performance indicators (KPIs) have been proposed to facilitate the quality management of embryo laboratories. However, the effects of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocols on KPIs have not been adequately explored. This study aims to assess the variation in KPIs across four different COS protocols. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 51,728 IVF/ICSI cycles in our center between 2014 and 2022. They were divided into four groups based on COS protocols: follicular phase long-acting (FPL) GnRH-a long, luteal phase short-acting (LPS) GnRH-a long, GnRH-ant, and micro-stimulation protocol groups. Several KPIs were compared across the four groups, and the results were validated in three age bands (<35 years, 35-38 years, and >38 years). Multivariable regression analysis was conducted to assess the effect of COS protocols on KPIs. Results: 1) Significant differences were observed among the four groups in total blastocyst development rate (BLR) (56.2%, 54.1%, 49.7%, 29.5%, p < 0.001), total good blastocyst development rate (GBLR) (26.8%, 30.4%, 21.1%, 13.1%, p < 0.001), and implantation rate (46.6%, 30.7%, 24.2%, 13.1%, p < 0.001). 2) The LPS GnRH-a group showed a higher total GBLR (30.4%, 26.8%, p < 0.001) but a lower implantation rate compared to the FPL GnRH-a group (30.7%, 46.6%, p < 0.001). 3) Significant differences in KPIs were observed across all age groups, with the largest differences seen in women under 35 years 4) Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that these KPIs were significantly associated with the COS protocol. Conclusion: COS protocols significantly impact KPIs, suggesting that explore reliable KPIs according to treatment protocols could better evaluate the laboratory efficacy and provide a theoretical basis for personalized strategies for patients.
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.