MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103334000 · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmu001

Neonatal outcomes among singleton births after blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2014· review· en· W2103334000 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Reproduction Update · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsCReATe Fertility CentreWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSingletonBlastocyst TransferObstetricsSingle Embryo TransferMedicineBlastocystEmbryo transferMeta-analysisEmbryoPregnancyGynecologyBiologyEmbryogenesisInternal medicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Several studies have evaluated outcomes of singleton pregnancies after blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfer. Higher incidences of preterm birth (PTB), very preterm birth (VPTB), low birthweight (LBW) and congenital malformations were identified in a few of them. The objective of our study was to systematically review and meta-analyze pregnancy and neonatal outcomes among singleton births following blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfer. METHODS EMBASE, MEDLINE, EBM Reviews and bibliographies of included studies were searched from their inception until March 2013. Observational studies or clinical trials comparing blastocyst with cleavage stage embryo transfer and reporting on outcomes of PTB (<37 weeks), VPTB (<32 weeks), LBW (<2500 g), very low birthweight (VLBW) (<1500 g) and/or congenital anomalies in singleton neonates were included. Data on the outcomes were extracted by two reviewers. Statistical heterogeneity among studies was evaluated by calculating I(2) values and χ(2) statistics. Meta-analyses were conducted to estimate the pooled unadjusted odds ratio (OR) and the adjusted OR (AOR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random effect model. RESULTS Six observational studies, of low to moderate risk of bias, were included in this review. There were significantly higher odds of PTB (four studies, 54 792 cleavage stage and 20 724 blastocyst stage births; AOR 1.32, 95% CI 1.19-1.46) and congenital anomalies (two studies, 22 068 cleavage stage and 4517 blastocyst stage births; AOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03-1.62) among births after blastocyst transfer compared with cleavage stage transfer. There was no difference in the adjusted odds of VPTB (four studies, 54 792 cleavage stage and 20 724 blastocyst stage births; AOR 1.18, 95% CI 0.93-1.49), LBW (four studies, 54 109 cleavage stage and 20 392 blastocyst stage births; AOR 1.06, 95% CI 0.99-1.15) or VLBW (three studies, 22 088 cleavage stage and 5772 blastocyst stage births; AOR 1.01, 95% CI 0.73-1.38). CONCLUSIONS Risk of PTB in IVF singleton pregnancies is significantly higher following blastocyst transfer compared with cleavage stage transfer. Risk of congenital anomalies may also be higher but further studies are needed to confirm this finding and to identify reasons for such outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it