ArticleJournal of human reproductive sciences
Clinical Use of Non-Invasive Preimplantation Genetic Testing - A Joint Position Statement from the Indian Society for Assisted Reproduction, Indian Fertility Society and Academy of Clinical Embryologists.
Article in Journal of human reproductive sciences. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Indian Society for Assisted Reproduction (ISAR), Indian Fertility Society (IFS) and Academy of Clinical Embryologists (ACE) jointly recommend that non-invasive preimplantation genetic testing (niPGT) (whether using spent culture media or blastocoel fluid) should not be used in clinical practice at this time and does not recommend it for embryo ranking or selection for transfer in its present form. It has based this position statement on the following key considerations. (1) Diagnostic Accuracy: Current evidence indicates significant error rates, including unacceptably high false positives and false negatives, which undermine its reliability for clinical decision-making. (2) Clinical Efficacy: There is a lack of conclusive evidence that niPGT improves clinical outcomes such as implantation rates, pregnancy rates or live birth rates. The IFS, ISAR and ACE urge the medical and scientific communities to focus on research on niPGT to ensure its reliability and clinical applicability in the future.
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.