ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025
Live birth outcomes after first donor oocyte embryo transfer: a comparison by treatment pathways in poor prognosis patients.
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.
- Modeling polygenic embryo screening in real-world IVF patients demonstrates limitations on efficacy.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare live birth rates after the first donor oocyte embryo transfer between patients who began treatment as donor oocyte recipients and those who transitioned to donor oocyte following unsuccessful autologous in vitro fertilization (IVF).
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent their first donor oocyte embryo transfer between 2012 and 2024 at a single academic-affiliated fertility clinic. Patients were grouped by treatment pathway: immediate use of donor oocytes ("DONOR-1st") or secondary use following unsuccessful autologous IVF attempts ("IVF-1st"). The primary outcome was live birth after the first donor oocyte embryo transfer. Secondary outcomes included live birth per all donor oocyte embryo transfers and time from initial consultation to live birth.
resultsOne-hundred fifty-seven DONOR-1st and 196 IVF-1st patients were included. The live birth rate after the first donor oocyte embryo transfer was similar between groups (DONOR-1st: 59.2% vs. IVF-1st: 53.1%, p = 0.24). Live birth rates across all donor transfers were comparable (DONOR-1st: 50.4% (250 transfers) vs. IVF-1st: 49.2% (327 transfers), p = 0.82). DONOR-1st patients reached the transfer that resulted in a live birth significantly faster than IVF-1st patients (13.2 ± 9.9 vs. 21.0 ± 13.7 months, p < 0.01).
conclusionLive birth rate after the first donor oocyte embryo transfer was comparable between patients who initially attempted autologous IVF without success and those who initiated treatment as donor recipients. Prior autologous IVF does not appear to negatively associate with reproductive potential, evidenced by successful outcomes with subsequent donor oocyte use. However, for patients with poor prognosis, donor oocyte use may provide a more efficient treatment pathway.
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.