Literature DB >> 10783353

External validation of the templeton model for predicting success after IVF.

J M Smeenk1, A M Stolwijk, J A Kremer, D D Braat.   

Abstract

This study aimed to externally validate the prognostic model presented by Templeton in 1996 for live births resulting from IVF treatment. Data were used from the University Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, from March 1991 to January 1999. The predictive capacity of the model in our population discriminated between those women with a low probability of success and those with a relatively high probability. Despite these encouraging findings, our data show that implementation of the model in clinical decision-making remains difficult. The Templeton model is not applicable or usable in daily clinical practice, because the model did not give more information about the prognosis for the vast majority of the patients. Therefore, the search for better prognostic factors resulting in better predictive models should continue.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10783353     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/15.5.1065

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  9 in total

1.  To what extent does Anti-Mullerian Hormone contribute to a better prediction of live birth after IVF?

Authors:  Catherine Rongieres; Carolina Colella; Philippe Lehert
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2014-11-05       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Can Ratios Between Prognostic Factors Predict the Clinical Pregnancy Rate in an IVF/ICSI Program with a GnRH Agonist-FSH/hMG Protocol? An Assessment of 2421 Embryo Transfers, and a Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Philippe Merviel; Michel Menard; Rosalie Cabry; Florence Scheffler; Emmanuelle Lourdel; Marie-Thérèse Le Martelot; Sylvie Roche; Jean-Jacques Chabaud; Henri Copin; Hortense Drapier; Moncef Benkhalifa; Damien Beauvillard
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2020-09-04       Impact factor: 3.060

3.  Prognosis of fracture: evaluation of predictive accuracy of the FRAX algorithm and Garvan nomogram.

Authors:  S K Sandhu; N D Nguyen; J R Center; N A Pocock; J A Eisman; T V Nguyen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-07-25       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Predicting live birth, preterm delivery, and low birth weight in infants born from in vitro fertilisation: a prospective study of 144,018 treatment cycles.

Authors:  Scott M Nelson; Debbie A Lawlor
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2011-01-04       Impact factor: 11.069

5.  External validation and calibration of IVFpredict: a national prospective cohort study of 130,960 in vitro fertilisation cycles.

Authors:  Andrew D A C Smith; Kate Tilling; Debbie A Lawlor; Scott M Nelson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Prediction models in in vitro fertilization; where are we? A mini review.

Authors:  Laura van Loendersloot; S Repping; P M M Bossuyt; F van der Veen; M van Wely
Journal:  J Adv Res       Date:  2013-05-09       Impact factor: 10.479

7.  Adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the IVF cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer.

Authors:  Véronika Grzegorczyk-Martin; Julie Roset; Pierre Di Pizio; Thomas Fréour; Paul Barrière; Jean Luc Pouly; Michael Grynberg; Isabelle Parneix; Catherine Avril; Joe Pacheco; Tomasz M Grzegorczyk
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2022-06-29       Impact factor: 3.357

8.  Predicting live birth chances for women with multiple consecutive failing IVF cycles: a simple and accurate prediction for routine medical practice.

Authors:  Géraldine Porcu; Philippe Lehert; Carolina Colella; Claude Giorgetti
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2013-01-09       Impact factor: 5.211

Review 9.  Models Predicting Success of Infertility Treatment: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Alireza Zarinara; Hojjat Zeraati; Koorosh Kamali; Kazem Mohammad; Parisa Shahnazari; Mohammad Mehdi Akhondi
Journal:  J Reprod Infertil       Date:  2016 Apr-Jun
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.