ArticleBMJ open2026
Multicentre randomised comparative effectiveness trial of cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in patients with few embryos (PRECISE): implementation of a study protocol in reproductive medicine.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06746129 (Day 3 Versus Day 5 Embryo Transfer in IVF Patients With Few Embryos), which is not on this 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.
Day 3 Versus Day 5 Embryo Transfer in IVF Patients With Few Embryos
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
26 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWith improvements in in vitro culture techniques, there has been a steady shift in practice to transfer in vitro fertilisation (IVF) embryos at the blastocyst-stage to increase pregnancy rates per embryo transfer (ET) and reduce the risk of multiple pregnancy. In patients with fewer embryos (≤5 zygotes), fresh cleavage-stage ET is still commonly performed to reduce the risk of cycle cancellation if no embryo survives to the blastocyst-stage in vitro. However, evidence for improved outcomes with cleavage-stage embryo transfer in this subgroup of patients is lacking. We will compare blastocyst-stage to cleavage-stage ET with regard to cumulative live birth rates (CLBR) per oocyte retrieval and other patient-centred cycle outcomes in patients with ≤5 zygotes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Multicentre, randomised pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial with superiority design comparing blastocyst-stage to cleavage-stage ET in patients with ≤5 zygotes. This trial will enrol and randomise 1126 women aged 18-44 undergoing IVF to either fresh cleavage-stage or blastocyst-stage ET at eleven IVF centres. Surplus embryos will be vitrified at the blastocyst-stage. The primary outcome is the CLBR per oocyte retrieval. Secondary outcomes include: multiple pregnancy, pregnancy loss <20 weeks and cycle cancellation. Exploratory outcomes include: live birth per fresh ET, ectopic pregnancy, time to pregnancy, stillbirth, preterm birth, financial burden, patient distress and facilitators and barriers for patient involvement and implementation. All primary analyses will be conducted according to the intent-to-treat principle. We also will report per-protocol analyses as a sensitivity analysis. A multidisciplinary stakeholder team, including a 5-patient stakeholder panel, will participate in study design, conduct and oversight. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Institutional Review Board at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) provides central regulatory oversight. Results will inform timing of embryo transfer in patients with ≤5 zygotes and will be disseminated through academic publications, meeting presentations and communications to advocacy groups and patient participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06746129.
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.