The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo: a randomized controlled trial
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: To test whether ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization (IVF) affects oocyte quality and thus chromosome segregation behaviour during meiosis and early embryo development, preimplantation genetic screening of embryos was employed in a prospective, randomized controlled trial, comparing two ovarian stimulation regimens. METHODS: Infertile patients under 38 years of age were randomly assigned to undergo a mild stimulation regimen using gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist co-treatment (67 patients), which does not disrupt secondary follicle recruitment, or a conventional high-dose exogenous gonadotrophin regimen and GnRH agonist co-treatment (44 patients). Following IVF, embryos were biopsied at the eight-cell stage and the copy number of 10 chromosomes was analysed in 1 or 2 blastomeres. RESULTS: The study was terminated prematurely, after an unplanned interim analysis (which included 61% of the planned number of patients) found a lower embryo aneuploidy rate following mild stimulation. Compared with conventional stimulation, significantly fewer oocytes and embryos were obtained following mild stimulation (P < 0.01 and < 0.05, respectively). Consequently, both regimens generated on average a similar number (1.8) of chromosomally normal embryos. Differences in rates of mosaic embryos suggest an effect of ovarian stimulation on mitotic segregation errors. CONCLUSIONS: Future ovarian stimulation strategies should avoid maximizing oocyte yield, but aim at generating a sufficient number of chromosomally normal embryos by reduced interference with ovarian physiology.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Incidence of early loss of pregnancy
Wilcox, A. J., Weinberg, C. R., O'Connor, J. F., Baird, D. D., Schlatterer, J. P., Canfield, R. E., Armstrong, E. G., & Nisula, B. C. (1988) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198807283190401 · Cited by 2,354
Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials
POCOCK, S. J. (1977) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/64.2.191 · Cited by 1,831
Cited by
Albuz, F. K., Sasseville, M., Lane, M., Armstrong, D. T., Thompson, J. G., & Gilchrist, R. B. (2010) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/deq246 · Cited by 284
Sub-optimal responders following controlled ovarian stimulation: an overlooked group?
Polyzos, N. P., & Sunkara, S. K. (2015) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/dev149 · Cited by 106
Metadata
- Authors
- Baart, E. B., Martini, E., Eijkemans, M. J., Van Opstal, D., Beckers, N. G. M., Verhoeff, A., Macklon, N. S., & Fauser, B. C. J. M.
- Venue
- Human Reproduction
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2007-01-04
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 980-988
- ISSN
- 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2350
- OpenAlex
- W2117470501
- Cited by
- 609
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 36.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo: a randomized controlled trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/humrep/del484
- The paper
- Baart, E. B., Martini, E., Eijkemans, M. J., Van Opstal, D., Beckers, N. G. M., Verhoeff, A., Macklon, N. S., & Fauser, B. C. J. M. (2007). Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo: a randomized controlled trial. Human Reproduction. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del484
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.