ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2026
Embryo mix-up due to erroneous identification in the context of medically assisted reproduction.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The accurate identification of gametes, embryos, and patients is a fundamental requirement for the intended treatment in the context of assisted reproductive technology (ART). Embryo mix-ups are among the most serious errors in ART and are considered highly sensitive, which can impede error management and the identification of error sources. Here, we present five cases of embryo mix-ups that occurred at five different ART facilities. These reports highlight misidentification of patients and specimens as underlying factors in all five mix-up cases and emphasize the importance of facility-wide root cause analysis to improve process safety for patients and staff. Although human error was an important factor, the underlying conditions that make these critical errors possible must be identified to allow for effective risk mitigation. In all cases, a sequence of errors led to embryo mix-ups that could have been prevented by adherence to clear institutional guidelines and workflows regarding patient identification and verification of patient and sample identities prior to embryo transfer. It is important that operating guidelines are integrated into daily work routines and ART facilities have control systems in place to monitor critical steps and allow for the detection of error sources or faulty processes to prevent subsequent damage.
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.