Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 314

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical validation of embryo culture and selection by morphokinetic analysis: a randomized, controlled trial of the EmbryoScope

Open access
Rubio, Irene, Galán, Arancha, Larreategui, Zaloa, Ayerdi, Fernando, Bellver, Jose, Herrero, Javier, Meseguer, Marcos·2014·Fertility and Sterility

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether incubation in the integrated EmbryoScope time-lapse monitoring system (TMS) and selection supported by the use of a multivariable morphokinetic model improve reproductive outcomes in comparison with incubation in a standard incubator (SI) embryo culture and selection based exclusively on morphology. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded, controlled study. SETTING: University-affiliated private in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinic. PATIENT(S): Eight hundred forty-three infertile couples undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). INTERVENTION(S): No patient intervention; embryos cultured in SI with development evaluated only by morphology (control group) and embryos cultured in TMS with embryo selection was based on a multivariable model (study group). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Rates of embryo implantation, pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy (OPR), and early pregnancy loss. RESULT(S): Analyzing per treated cycle, the ongoing pregnancy rate was statistically significantly increased 51.4% (95% CI, 46.7-56.0) for the TMS group compared with 41.7% (95% CI, 36.9-46.5) for the SI group. For pregnancy rate, differences were not statistically significant at 61.6% (95% CI, 56.9-66.0) versus 56.3% (95% CI, 51.4-61.0). The results per transfer were similar: statistically significant differences in ongoing pregnancy rate of 54.5% (95% CI, 49.6-59.2) versus 45.3% (95% CI, 40.3-50.4) and not statistically significant for pregnancy rate at 65.2% (95% CI, 60.6-69.8) versus 61.1% (95% CI, 56.2-66.1). Early pregnancy loss was statistically significantly decreased for the TMS group with 16.6% (95% CI, 12.6-21.4) versus 25.8% (95% CI, 20.6-31.9). The implantation rate was statistically significantly increased at 44.9% (95% CI, 41.4-48.4) versus 37.1% (95% CI, 33.6-40.7). CONCLUSION(S): The strategy of culturing and selecting embryos in the integrated EmbryoScope time-lapse monitoring system improves reproductive outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01549262.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.07.738

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 20 references

Cited by

See all 314

Metadata

Authors
Rubio, I., Galán, A., Larreategui, Z., Ayerdi, F., Bellver, J., Herrero, J., & Meseguer, M.
Venue
Fertility and Sterility
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-11
Volume
102
Issue
5
Pages
1287-1294.e5
ISSN
0015-0282 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2057755432
Cited by
314
References
20
FWCI
37.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical validation of embryo culture and selection by morphokinetic analysis: a randomized, controlled trial of the EmbryoScope. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.07.738
The paper
Rubio, I., Galán, A., Larreategui, Z., Ayerdi, F., Bellver, J., Herrero, J., & Meseguer, M. (2014). Clinical validation of embryo culture and selection by morphokinetic analysis: a randomized, controlled trial of the EmbryoScope. Fertility and Sterility. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.07.738

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.