David K, Gardner DP, Lane M, John Stevens MT, Terry Schlenker MA, Schoolcraft WB, M.D. Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril. 2000;73:1155–8.

Article  Google Scholar 

Morbeck DE. Blastocyst culture in the Era of PGS and FreezeAlls: is a ‘C’ a failing grade? Hum Reprod Open. 2017;2017(3):hox017.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Braga DP, Setti AS, Figueira RC, Iaconelli A Jr, Borges E Jr. The importance of the cleavage stage morphology evaluation for blastocyst transfer in patients with good prognosis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014;31(8):1105–10.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

della Tiziana Ragione GV, Evangelos G Papanikolaou, van Lisbet Landuyt, Paul Devroey, and van Andre Steirteghem. Developmental stage on day-5 and fragmentation rate on day-3 can influence the implantation potential of top-quality blastocysts in IVF cycles with single embryo transfer. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2007;5:2.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Shen X, Long H, Gao H, Guo W, Xie Y, Chen D, et al. The valuable reference of live birth rate in the single vitrified-warmed BB/BC/CB blastocyst transfer: the cleavage-stage embryo quality and embryo development speed. Front Physiol. 2020;11:1102.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Wu J, Zhang J, Kuang Y, Chen Q, Wang Y. The effect of Day 3 cell number on pregnancy outcomes in vitrified-thawed single blastocyst transfer cycles. Hum Reprod. 2020;35(11):2478–87.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Guerif F, Lemseffer M, Leger J, Bidault R, Cadoret V, Chavez C, et al. Does early morphology provide additional selection power to blastocyst selection for transfer? Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;21(4):510–9.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Herbemont C, Sarandi S, Boujenah J, Cedrin-Durnerin I, Sermondade N, Vivot A, et al. Should we consider day-2 and day-3 embryo morphology before day-5 transfer when blastocysts reach a similar good quality? Reprod Biomed Online. 2017;35(5):521–8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Zilberberg E, Casper R, Meriano J, Barzilay E, Aizer A, Kirshenbaum M, et al. Cleavage vs blastocyst stage embryos: how are they interrelating? Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2021;304(4):1083–8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Cai J, Liu L, Zhang J, Qiu H, Jiang X, Li P, et al. Low body mass index compromises live birth rate in fresh transfer in vitro fertilization cycles: a retrospective study in a Chinese population. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(2):422–9 e2.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Alpha Scientists in Reproductive M, Embryology ESIGo. The Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(6):1270–83.

Article  Google Scholar 

Wang W, Cai J, Liu L, Xu Y, Liu Z, Chen J, et al. Does the transfer of a poor quality embryo with a good quality embryo benefit poor prognosis patients? Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2020;18(1):97.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Chen T, He T, Benesty M, Khotilovich V, Tang Y, Cho H, et al. XGboost: Extreme Gradient Boosting. R package version 1.5.2.1. 2023. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=xgboost.

Jerome Friedman TH, Tibshirani R. Regularization paths for generalized linear models via coordinate descent. J Stat Softw. 2010;33:1–22.

PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Kamran SC, Reichman DE, Missmer SA, Correia KF, Karaca N, Romano A, et al. Day 3 embryo shape as a morphologic selection parameter in in vitro fertilization. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29(10):1135–9.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Enatsu N, Miyatsuka I, An LM, Inubushi M, Enatsu K, Otsuki J, et al. A novel system based on artificial intelligence for predicting blastocyst viability and visualizing the explanation. Reprod Med Biol. 2022;21(1):e12443.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Sivanantham S, Saravanan M, Sharma N, Srinivasan J, Raja R. Morphology of inner cell mass: a better predictive biomarker of blastocyst viability. PeerJ. 2022;10:e13935.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Xiong F, Sun Q, Wang S, Yao Z, Chen P, Wan C, et al. A nomogram to assist blastocyst selection in vitrified-warmed embryo transfer cycles. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2022;48(7):1816–28.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Wu Y, Yang R, Lin H, Cao C, Jiao X, Zhang Q. A validated model for individualized prediction of live birth in patients with adenomyosis undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2022;13:902083.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Ma BX, Huang B, Chen D, Jin L, Rao Q. Are early embryo cleavage kinetics affected by energy substrates in different culture media? Curr Med Sci. 2022;42(6):1297–304.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Dhillon RK, McLernon DJ, Smith PP, Fishel S, Dowell K, Deeks JJ, et al. Predicting the chance of live birth for women undergoing IVF: a novel pretreatment counseling tool. Hum Reprod. 2016;31(1):84–92.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

McLernon DJ, Steyerberg EW, Te Velde ER, Lee AJ, Bhattacharya S. Predicting the chances of a live birth after one or more complete cycles of in vitro fertilization: population-based study of linked cycle data from 113 873 women. BMJ. 2016;355:i5735.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Blank C, Wildeboer RR, DeCroo I, Tilleman K, Weyers B, de Sutter P, et al. Prediction of implantation after blastocyst transfer in in vitro fertilization: a machine-learning perspective. Fertil Steril. 2019;111(2):318–26.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Fordham DE, Rosentraub D, Polsky AL, Aviram T, Wolf Y, Perl O, et al. Embryologist agreement when assessing blastocyst implantation probability: is data-driven prediction the solution to embryo assessment subjectivity? Hum Reprod. 2022;37(10):2275–90.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Lannon BM, Choi B, Hacker MR, Dodge LE, Malizia BA, Barrett CB, et al. Predicting personalized multiple birth risks after in vitro fertilization-double embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(1):69–76.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Luke B, Brown MB, Wantman E, Stern JE, Baker VL, Widra E, et al. A prediction model for live birth and multiple births within the first three cycles of assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(3):744–52.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Racowsky C, Combelles CM, Nureddin A, Pan Y, Finn A, Miles L, Gale S, O’Leary T, Jackson KV. Day 3 and day 5 morphological predictors of embryo viability. Reprod Biomed Online. 2003;6(3):323–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61852-4.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Desai NN, Goldstein J, Rowland DY, Goldfarb JM. Morphological evaluation of human embryos and derivation of an embryo quality scoring system specilic for day 3 embryos: a preliminary study. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(10):2190–6.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Rehman KS, Bukulmez O, Langley M, Carr BR, Nackley AC, Doody KM, et al. Late stages of embryo progression are a much better predictor of clinical pregnancy than early cleavage in intracytoplasmic sperm injection and in vitro fertilization cycles with blastocyst-stage transfer. Fertil Steril. 2007;87(5):1041–52.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Li M, Wang Y, Shi J. Do day-3 embryo grade predict day-5 blastocyst transfer outcomes in patients with good prognosis? Gynecol Endocrinol. 2019;35(1):36–9.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Liu Z, Jiang M, He L, Liu Y. Cell number considerations for blastocyst transfer in younger patients. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020;37(3):619–27.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Chen L, Wang J, Zhu L, Xu Z, Zhang N, Lin F, et al. The effect of the day 3 embryo cell number on the neonatal outcomes of day 5 single blastocyst transfer in frozen embryo transfer cycles. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2023;283:81–5.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Fu J, Wang XJ, Wang YW, Sun J, Gemzell-Danielsson K, Sun XX. The influence of early cleavage on embryo developmental potential and IVF/ICSI outcome. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009;26(8):437–41.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Theilgaard Lassen J, Fly Kragh M, Rimestad J, Nygard Johansen M, Berntsen J. Development and validation of deep learning based embryo selection across multiple days of transfer. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):4235.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Cai J, Liu L, Chen J, Liu Z, Jiang X, Chen H, et al. Day-3-embryo fragmentation is associated with singleton birth weight following fresh single blastocyst transfer: a retrospective study. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2022;13:919283.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Wardlaw AKBT. Monitoring low birth weight: an evaluation of international estimates and an updated estimation procedure. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83(3):178–85.

PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar