ReviewJBRA assisted reproduction2026
In vitro maturation 2.0: a new era for an underdog in ART.
Review in JBRA assisted reproduction, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In vitro maturation (IVM) of human oocytes, once a pioneering concept predating conventional IVF, has long remained an underutilized technique in assisted reproduction. Despite early promise, clinical adoption of IVM has been limited due to lower embryo developmental competence and live birth rates compared to IVF. However, recent advances in the understanding of oocyte physiology, including cumulus-oocyte communication, the regulatory roles of cAMP/cGMP signaling pathways, and endocrine modulation of meiotic resumption, have reignited interest in optimizing IVM protocols. Innovations such as biphasic Capacitation (CAPA) IVM systems and the use of ovarian somatic support cells (OSCs) derived from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) aim to replicate the dynamic follicular environment more accurately and enhance oocyte competence. Clinical studies suggest that, while IVM still results in modestly lower cumulative live birth rates compared to conventional IVF, it offers significant advantages for selected patient populations, particularly women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), high ovarian reserve, or those requiring fertility preservation. Importantly, current evidence supports the genetic and epigenetic safety of IVM-derived offspring. As technical refinements continue and professional education expands, IVM is poised to fulfill its potential as a safer, less invasive, and more accessible alternative within the landscape of assisted reproductive technologies.
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.