WITHDRAWN: Could blastocysts derived from abnormal fertilized zygotes be used? A systematic review and meta-analysis
Post-publication record
OpenAlex flags this work as retracted, but it carries no matching Retraction Watch record in this frame.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Current guidelines advise against using embryos derived from mono-pronuclei (1PN) or non-pronuclei (0PN) zygotes for clinical purposes. Nevertheless, recent studies have demonstrated that 1PN and 0PN zygotes can lead to healthy births. This study aimed to investigate the pregnancy outcomes of 1PN and 0PN blastocysts. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane databases were searched up to 14 March 2024. Eligible studies enrolled participants transferring 0PN or 1PN blastocysts, with two pronuclei (2PN) blastocysts used as the control. Clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate and live birth rate were the main outcomes. The results were presented as odds ratios (OR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) using random-effect models with the Mantel-Haenszel method. Additionally, a stratified analysis was conducted based on the type of fertilization. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Results: In total, 270 articles were identified, with 16 ultimately included in the meta-analysis. In total, 57,835 cycles were analysed: 1071 cycles in the 1PN group, 2324 cycles in the 0PN group, and 54,440 cycles in the 2PN group. The results indicated that 1PN or 0PN blastocysts were associated with lower clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates than 2PN blastocysts. Interestingly, there was no significant difference in live birth rate between 1PN blastocysts and 2PN blastocysts in patients undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), nor between 0PN blastocysts and 2PN blastocysts in patients undergoing in-vitro fertilization (IVF). Conclusion: Careful consideration should be given to the utilization of 1PN and 0PN blastocysts, especially if an improved methodology of non-invasive assessment of fertilization is available. At the very least, 1PN blastocysts in patients undergoing ICSI and 0PN blastocysts in patients undergoing IVF represent viable fertility options for patients facing abnormal fertilization in clinical practice.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".