Towards single embryo transfer? modelling clinical outcomes of potential treatment choices using multiple data sources: Predictive models and patient perspectives

Health Technology Assessment

Volumn 14, Issue 38, 2010, Pages 1-237

  Roberts, S A ^a   McGowan, L ^a   Hirst, W M ^a   Brison, D R ^a,b,c   Vail, A ^a   Lieberman, B A ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b ST MARY S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c Manchester Fertility Services   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CRYOPRESERVATION; ECONOMIC ASPECT; EMBRYO; EMBRYO CULTURE; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FERTILIZATION; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTERVIEW; LIVE BIRTH; MATERNAL MORBIDITY; MULTIPLE PREGNANCY; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; OOCYTE RETRIEVAL; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT SELECTION; PREDICTION; PREGNANCY RATE; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; PROGNOSIS; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; RISK REDUCTION; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL MODEL; TWIN PREGNANCY; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AREA UNDER CURVE; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; CRYOPRESERVATION; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; FOCUS GROUPS; HEALTH EDUCATION; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; LOGISTIC MODELS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; ODDS RATIO; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PROGNOSIS; ROC CURVE; SINGLE EMBRYO TRANSFER; STATISTICS AS TOPIC; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77955954515     PISSN: 13665278     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3310/hta14380     Document Type: Article

References (132)

1. Roberts SA. Models for assisted conception data with embryo-specific covariates. Stat Med 2007;26(1):156-70.
2. Roberts SA, Fitzgerald CT, Brison DR. Modelling the impact of single embryo transfer in a national health service IVF programme. Hum Reprod 2009;24(1):122-31.
3. Braude P. One child at a time. Reducing multiple births after IVF. London: HFEA; 2006.
4. Kitzinger J. Recalling the pain. Nurs Times 1990;86(3):38-40.
5. Kitzinger J. Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups. BMJ 1995;311(7000):299-302.
6. Pandian Z, Templeton A, Serour G, Bhattacharya S. Number of embryos for transfer after IVF and ICSI: a Cochrane review. Hum Reprod 2005;20(10):2681-7.
7. Pinborg A. IVF/ICSI twin pregnancies: risks and prevention. Hum Reprod Update 2005;11(6):575-93.
8. Bergh C. Single embryo transfer: a mini-review. Hum Reprod 2005;20(2):323-7.
9. Gerris JMR. Single embryo transfer and IVF/ICSI outcome: a balanced appraisal. Hum Reprod Update 2005;11(2):105-21.
10. Lukassen HG, Braat DD, Wetzels AM, Zielhuis GA, Adang EM, Scheenjes E, et al. Two cycles with single embryo transfer versus one cycle with double embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2005;20(3):702-8.
11. Cutting R, Morroll D, Roberts SA, Pickering S, Rutherford A. Elective single embryo transfer: guidelines for practice British Fertility Society and Association of Clinical Embryologists. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2008;11(3):1-16.
12. Gardner DK, Surrey E, Minjarez D, Leitz A, Stevens J, Schoolcraft WB., Single blastocyst transfer: a prospective randomized trial. Fertil Steril 2004;81(3):551-5.
13. Gerris J, De Neubourg D, Mangelschots K, Van Royen E, Van de Meerssche M, Valkenburg M. Prevention of twin pregnancy after in-vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection based on strict embryo criteria: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Hum Reprod 1999;14(10):2581-7.
14. Martikainen H, Tiitinen A, Tomas C, Tapanainen J, Orava M, Tuomivaara L, et al. One versus two embryo transfer after IVF and ICSI: a randomized study. Hum Reprod 2001;16(9):1900-3.
15. Thurin A, Hausken J, Hillensjo T, Jablonowska B, Pinborg A, Strandell A, et al. Elective single-embryo transfer versus double-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med 2004;351(23):2392-402.
16. van Montfoort APA, Janssen JM, Fiddelers AAA, Derhaag JG, Dirksen CD, Evers JLH, et al. Single versus double embryo transfer: a randomised study. Hum Reprod 2005;19(Suppl. 1):I134.
17. Moustafa MK, Sheded SA, Mousta MAEA. Elective single embryo transfer versus double embryo transfer in assisted reproduction. Reprod Biomed Online 2008;17(1):82-7.
18. van Montfoort AP, Fiddelers AA, Janssen JM, Derhaag JG, Dirksen CD, Dunselman GA, et al. In unselected patients, elective single embryo transfer prevents all multiples, but results in significantly lower pregnancy rates compared with double embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2006;21(2):338-43.
19. Gleicher N, Barad D. Twin pregnancy, contrary to consensus, is a desirable outcome in infertility. Fertil Steril 2009;91(6):2426-31.
20. Bhattacharya S, Templeton A. What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? Redefining success in the context of elective single embryo transfer: evidence, intuition and financial reality. Hum Reprod 2004;19(9):1939-42.
21. Blennborn M, Nilsson S, Hillervik C, Hellberg D. The couple's decision-making in IVF: one or two embryos at transfer? Hum Reprod 2005;20(5):1292-7.
22. Pinborg A, Loft A, Schmidt L, Andersen AN. Attitudes of IVF/ICSI-twin mothers towards twins and single embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 2003;18(3):621-7.
23. Gleicher N, Campbell DP, Chan CL, Karande V, Rao R, Balin M, et al. The desire for multiple births in couples with infertility problems contradicts present practice patterns. Hum Reprod 1995;10(5):1079-84.
24. Goldfarb J, Kinzer DJ, Boyle M, Kurit D. Attitudes of in vitro fertilization and intrauterine insemination couples toward multiple gestation pregnancy and multifetal pregnancy reduction. Fertil Steril 1996;65(4):815-20.
25. Porter M, Bhattacharya S. Investigation of staff and patients' opinions of a proposed trial of elective single embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 2005;20(9):2523-30.
26. Murray S, Shetty A, Rattray A, Taylor V, Bhattacharya S. A randomized comparison of alternative methods of information provision on the acceptability of elective single embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 2004;19(4):911-16.
27. Ajzen I. Attitudes, personality and behaviour. Milton Keynes: Open University Press; 2005.
28. Twisk M, van der Veen F, Repping S, Heineman MJ, Korevaar JC, Bossuyt PM. Preferences of subfertile women regarding elective single embryo transfer: additional in vitro fertilization cycles are acceptable, lower pregnancy rates are not. Fertil Steril 2007;88(4):1006-9.
29. van Peperstraten AM, Nelen WLDM, Hermens RPMG, Jansen L, Scheenje E, Braat DDM, et al. Why don't we perform elective single embryo transfer? A qualitative study among IVF patients and professionals. Hum Reprod 2008;23(9):2036-42.
30. Blennborn M, Hellberg D, Nilsson S. Differences in female and male perception of information and decision-making in single-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization in Sweden. J Assist Reprod Genet 2007;24(8):337-42.
31. Scotland GS, McNamee P, Peddie VL, Bhattacharya S. Safety versus success in elective single embryo transfer: women's preferences for outcomes of in vitro fertilisation. BJOG 2007;114(8):977-83.
32. Deyo RA. A key medical decision maker: the patient. BMJ 2001;323(7311):466-7.
33. De Neubourg D, Gerris J, Mangelschots K, Van RE, Vercruyssen M, Elseviers M. Single top quality embryo transfer as a model for prediction of early pregnancy outcome. Hum Reprod 2004;19(6):1476-9.
34. Ebner T, Moser M, Sommergruber M, Tews G. Selection based on morphological assessment of oocytes and embryos at different stages of preimplantation development: a review. Hum Reprod Update 2003;9(3):251-62.
35. Brison DR, Houghton FD, Falconer D, Roberts SA, Hawkhead J, Humpherson PG, et al. Identification of viable embryos in IVF by non-invasive measurement of amino acid turnover. Hum Reprod 2004;19(10):2319-24.
36. Brison DR, Hollywood K, Arnesen R, Goodacre R. Predicting human embryo viability: the road to non-invasive analysis of the secretome using metabolic footprinting. Reprod Biomed Online 2007;15(3):296-302.
37. El-Toukhy T, Khalaf Y, Braude P. IVF results: Optimize not maximize. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;194(2):322-31.
38. Khalaf Y, El-Toukhy T, Coomarasamy A, Kamal A, Bolton V, Braude P. Selective single blastocyst transfer reduces the multiple pregnancy rate and increases pregnancy rates: a pre- and postintervention study. BJOG 2008;115(3):385-90.
39. Blake D, Proctor M, Johnson N, Olive D. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted conception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005;4:CD002118.
40. Munne S, Chen S, Fischer J, Colls P, Zheng XZ, Stevens J, et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis reduces pregnancy loss in women aged 35 years and older with a history of recurrent miscarriages. Fertil Steril 2005;84(2):331-5.
41. Hardarson T, Hanson C, Lundin K, Hillensjo T, Nilsson L, Stevic J, et al. Preimplantation genetic screening in women of advanced maternal age caused a decrease in clinical pregnancy rate: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2008;23(12):2806-12.
42. Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, Sikkema-Raddatz B, Korevaar JC, Verhoeve HR, et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med 2007;357(1):9-17.
43. Horne G, Critchlow JD, Newman MC, Edozien L, Matson PL, Lieberman BA. A prospective evaluation of cryopreservation strategies in a two-embryo transfer programme. Hum Reprod 1997;12(3):542-7.
44. Fiddelers AAA, Severens JL, Dirksen CD, Dumoulin JCM, Land JA, Evers JLH. Economic evaluations of single- versus double-embryo transfer in IVF. Hum Reprod Update 2007;13(1):5-13.
45. Ledger WL, Anumba D, Marlow N, Thomas CM, Wilson EC. The costs to the NHS of multiplebirths after IVF treatment in the UK. BJOG 2006;113(1):21-5.
46. Gerris J, De Neubourg D, Mangelschots K, Van Royen E, Vercruyssen M, Barudy-Vasquez J, et al. Elective single day 3 embryo transfer halves the twinning rate without decrease in the ongoing pregnancy rate of an IVF/ICSI programme. Hum Reprod 2002;17(10):2626-31.
47. Martikainen H, Orava M, Lakkakorpi J, Tuomivaara L. Day 2 elective single embryo transfer in clinical practice: better outcome in ICSI cycles. Hum Reprod 2004;19(6):1364-6.
48. De Neubourg D, Mangelschots K, Van Royen E, Vercruyssen M, Ryckaert G, Valkenburg M, et al. Impact of patients' choice for single embryo transfer of a top quality embryo versus double embryo transfer in the first IVF/ICSI cycle. Hum Reprod 2002;17(10):2621-5.
49. Tiitinen A, Unkila-Kallio L, Halttunen M, Hyden-Granskog C. Impact of elective single embryo transfer on the twin pregnancy rate. Hum Reprod 2003;18(7):1449-53.
50. van Montfoort AP, Dumoulin JC, Land JA, Coonen E, Derhaag JG, Evers JL. Elective single embryo transfer (eSET) policy in the first three IVF/ICSI treatment cycles. Hum Reprod 2005;20(2):433-6.
51. Vilska S, Tiitinen A, Hyden-Granskog C, Hovatta O. Elective transfer of one embryo results in an acceptable pregnancy rate and eliminates the risk of multiple birth. Hum Reprod 1999;14(9):2392-5.
52. Strandell A, Bergh C, Lundin K. Selection of patients suitable for one-embryo transfer may reduce the rate of multiple births by half without impairment of overall birth rates. Hum Reprod 2000;15(12):2520-5.
53. Hunault CC, Eijkemans MJC, Pieters MHEC, Velde ERT, Habbema JDF, Fauser BCJM, et al. A prediction model for selecting patients undergoing in vitro fertilization for elective single embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2002;77(4):725-32.
54. Zhou HB, Weinberg CR. Evaluating effects of exposures on embryo viability and uterine receptivity in in vitro fertilization. Stat Med 1998;17(14):1601-12.
55. Dukic V, Hogan JW. A hierarchical Bayesian approach to modeling embryo implantation following in vitro fertilization. Biostatistics 2002;3(3):361-77.
56. Jurisica I, Mylopoulos J, Glasgow J, Shapiro H, Casper RF. Case-based reasoning in IVF: prediction and knowledge mining. Artif Intell Med 1998;12(1):1-24.
57. Hogan JW, Scharfstein DO. Estimating causal effects from multiple cycle data in studies of in vitro fertilization. Stat Meth Med Res 2006;15(2):195-209.
58. McDonnell J, Goverde AJ, Rutten FFH, Vermeiden JPW. Multivariate Markov chain analysis of the probability of pregnancy in infertile couples undergoing assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod 2002;17(1):103-6.
59. Bancsi LFJM, Broekmans FJM, Mol BWJ, Habbema JDF, Velde ERT. Performance of basal follicle-stimulating hormone in the prediction of poor ovarian response and failure to become pregnant after in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2003;79(5):1091-100.
60. Akande VA, Fleming CF, Hunt LP, Keay SD, Jenkins JM. Biological versus chronological ageing of oocytes, distinguishable by raised FSH levels in relation to the success of IVF treatment. Hum Reprod 2002;17(8):2003-8.
61. Alsalili M, Yuzpe AA, Tummon IS, Parker J, Martin JSB, Nisker JA, et al. Confounding variables affecting in-vitro fertilization success - a decade of experience. J Assist Reprod Genet 1995;12(2):88-92.
62. Chuang CC, Chen CD, Chao KH, Chen SU, Ho HN, Yang YS. Age is a better predictor of pregnancy potential than basal follicle-stimulating hormone levels in women undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2003;79(1):63-8.
63. Commenges-Ducos M, Tricaud S, Papaxanthos-Roche A, Dallay D, Horovitz J, Commenges D. Modelling of the probability of success of the stages of in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: stimulation, fertilization and implantation. Hum Reprod 1998;13(1):78-83.
64. Croucher CA, Lass A, Margara R, Winston RM. Predictive value of the results of a first in-vitro fertilization cycle on the outcome of subsequent cycles. Hum Reprod 1998;13(2):403-8.
65. Elizur SE, Lerner-Geva L, Levron J, Shulman A, Bider D, Dor J. Factors predicting IVF treatment outcome: a multivariate analysis of 5310 cycles. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;10(5):645-9.
66. Engmann L, Maconochie N, Tan SL, Bekir J. Trends in the incidence of births and multiple births and the factors that determine the probability of multiple birth after IVF treatment. Hum Reprod 2001;16(12):2598-605.
67. Haan G, Bernardus RE, Hollanders JMG, Leerentveld RA, Prak FM, Naaktgeboren N. Results of IVF from a prospective multicenter study. Hum Reprod 1991;6(6):805-10.
68. Haggarty P, McCallum H, McBain H, Andrews K, Duthie S, McNeill G, et al. Effect of B vitamins and genetics on success of in-vitro fertilisation: prospective cohort study. Lancet 2006;367(9521):1513-19.
69. Kupka MS, Dorn C, Richter O, Felberbaum R, van der Ven H. Impact of reproductive history on in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcome: evidence from the German IVF Registry. Fertil Steril 2003;80(3):508-16.
70. Lee TH, Chen CD, Tsai YY, Chang LJ, Ho HN, Yang YS. Embryo quality is more important for younger women whereas age is more important for older women with regard to in vitro fertilization outcome and multiple pregnancy. Fertil Steril 2006;86(1):64-9.
71. Minaretzis D, Harris D, Alper MM, Mortola JF, Berger MJ, Power D. Multivariate analysis of factors predictive of successful live births in in vitro fertilization (IVF) suggests strategies to improve IVF outcome. J Assist Reprod Genet 1998;15(6):365-71.
72. Ottosen LDM, Kesmodel U, Hindkjaer J, Ingerslev HJ. Pregnancy prediction models and eSET criteria for IVF patients - do we need more information? J Assist Reprod Genet 2007;24(1):29-36.
73. Rhodes TL, Mccoy TP, Higdon HL, Boone WR. Factors affecting assisted reproductive technology (ART) pregnancy rates: a multivariate analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet 2005;22(9-10):335-46.
74. Roseboom TJ, Vermeiden JPW, Schoute E, Lens JW, Schats R. The probability of pregnancy after embryo transfer is affected by the age of the patient, cause of infertility, number of embryos transferred and the average morphology score, as revealed by multiple logistic regression analysis. Hum Reprod 1995;10(11):3035-41.
75. Sabatin L, Zosmer A, Hennessy EM, Tozer A, Al-Shawaf T. Relevance of basal serum FSH to IVF outcome varies with patient age. Reprod Biomed Online 2008;17(1):10-19.
76. Sharif K, Elgendy M, Lashen H, Afnan M. Age and basal follicle stimulating hormone as predictors of in vitro fertilisation outcome. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105(1):107-12.
77. Stolwijk AM, Zielhuis GA, Hamilton CJCM, Straatman H, Hollanders JMG, Goverde HJM, et al. Prognostic models for the probability of achieving an ongoing pregnancy after in-vitro fertilization and the importance of testing their predictive value. Hum Reprod 1996;11(10):2298-303.
78. Tan SL, Royston P, Campbell S, Jacobs HS, Betts J, Mason B, et al. Cumulative conception and live birth rates after in vitro fertilization. Lancet 1992;339(8806):1390-4.
79. Templeton A, Morris JK, Parslow W. Factors that affect outcome of in-vitro fertilisation treatment. Lancet 1996;348(9039):1402-6.
80. Terriou P, Sapin C, Giorgetti C, Hans E, Spach JL, Roulier R. Embryo score is a better predictor of pregnancy than the number of transferred embryos or female age. Fertil Steril 2001;75(3):525-31.
81. Tsafrir A, Simon A, Revel A, Reubinoff B, Lewin A, Laufer N. Retrospective analysis of 1217 IVF cycles in women aged 40 years and older. Reprod Biomed Online 2007;14(3):348-55.
82. van der Gaast MH, Eijkemans MJC, van der Net JB, de Boer EJ, Burger CW, van Leeuwen FE, et al. Optimum number of oocytes for a successful first IVF treatment cycle. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;13(4):476-80.
83. Wald M, Sparks AET, Sandlow J, Van-Voorhis B, Syrop CH, Niederberger CS. Computational models for prediction of IVF/ICSI outcomes with surgically retrieved spermatozoa. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;11(3):325-31.
84. Weigert M, Feichtinger W, Kulin S, Kaali SG, Dorau P, Bauer P. Seasonal influences on in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. J Assist Reprod Genet 2001;18(11):598-602.
85. Wheeler CA, Cole BF, Frishman GN, Seifer DB, Lovegreen SB, Hackett RJ. Predicting probabilities of pregnancy and multiple gestation from in vitro fertilization - a new model. Obstet Gynecol 1998;91(5):696-700.
86. van der Gaast MH, Eijkemans MJC, van der Net JB, de Boer EJ, Burger CW, van Leeuwen FE, et al. Optimum number of oocytes for a successful first IVF treatment cycle. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;13(4):476-80.
87. Wilding M, Di Matteo L, D'Andretti S, Montanaro N, Capobianco C, Dale B. An oocyte score for use in assisted reproduction. J Assist Reprod Genet 2007;24(8):350-8.
88. Dafopoulos K, Griesinger G, Schultze-Mosgau A, Orief Y, Schopper B, Nikolettos N, et al. Factors affecting outcome after ICSI with spermatozoa retrieved from cryopreserved testicular tissue in non-obstructive azoospermia. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;10(4):455-60.
89. Ferlitsch K, Sator MO, Gruber DM, Rucklinger E, Gruber CJ, Huber JC. Body mass index, folliclestimulating hormone and their predictive value in in vitro fertilization. J Assist Reprod Genet 2004;21(12):431-6.
90. Fujimoto A, Fujiwara T, Osuga Y, Yano T, Tsutsumi O, Taketani Y. Predictive factors of assisted reproductive technology outcome in women over the age of 40. Fertil Steril 2007;88(Suppl. 1):S133.
91. Yanushpolsky EH, Hurwitz S, Tikh E, Racowsky C. Predictive usefulness of cycle day 10 follicle-stimulating hormone level in a clomiphene citrate challenge test for in vitro fertilization outcome in women younger than 40 years of age. Fertil Steril 2003;80(1):111-15.
92. de Klerk C, Hunfeld JAM, Heijnen EMEW, Eijkemans MJC, Fauser BCJM, Passchier J, et al. Low negative affect prior to treatment is associated with a decreased chance of live birth from a first IVF cycle. Hum Reprod 2008;23(1):112-16.
93. Tan SL, Maconochie N, Doyle P, Campbell S, Balen A, Bekir J, et al. Cumulative conception and live-birth rates after in-vitro fertilization with and without the use of long, short, and ultrashort regimens of the gonadotropin-releasinghormone agonist buserelin. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;171(2):513-20.
94. Morris SN, Missmer SA, Cramer DW, Powers RD, McShane PM, Hornstein MD. Effects of lifetime exercise on the outcome of in vitro fertilization. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108(4):938-45.
95. Purcell K, Schembri M, Frazier LM, Rall MJ, Shen SH, Croughan M, et al. Asian ethnicity is associated with reduced pregnancy outcomes after assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril 2007;87(2):297-302.
96. Sneed ML, Uhler ML, Grotjan HE, Rapisarda JJ, Lederer KJ, Beltsos AN. Body mass index: impact on IVF success appears age-related. Hum Reprod 2008;23(8):1835-9.
97. Ecochard R, Clayton DG. Multi-level modelling of conception in artificial insemination by donor. Stat Med 1998;17(10):1137-56.
98. Speirs AL, Lopata A, Gronow MJ, Kellow GN, Johnston WIH. Analysis of the benefits and risks of multiple embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 1983;39(4):468-71.
99. Vitthala S, Gelbaya T, Brison D, Fitzgerald C, Nardo L. The risk of monozygotic twins after assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2009;15(1):45-55.
100. Matorras R, Matorras F, Mendoza R, Rodriguez M, Remohi J, Rodriguez-Escudero FJ, et al. The implantation of every embryo facilitates the chances of the remaining embryos to implant in an IVF programme: a mathematical model to predict pregnancy and multiple pregnancy rates. Hum Reprod 2005;20(10):2923-31.
101. R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2008.
102. Nocedal J, Wright SJ. Numerical optimization, 2nd edn. New York: Springer; 2006.
103. Efron B, Tibshirani R. An introduction to the bootstrap. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 1993.
104. Harrell FE Jr. Regression modeling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2001.
105. QSR International. NVivo qualitative data analysis software, Version 7. Melbourne: QSR International; 2006.
106. Ritchie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis in applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess RG, eds. Analysing qualitative data. London: Routledge; 1994.
107. Austin CM, Stewart SP, Goldfarb JM, Sheean LA, Gindlesperger VR, Duchon MA. Limiting multiple pregnancy in in vitro fertilization embryo transfer (IVF-ET) cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet 1996;13(7):540-5.
108. Lek YY, Bishop GD. Perceived vulnerability to illness threats - the role of disease type, risk factor perception and attributions. Psychology Health 1995;10(3):205-17.
109. Schwarzer R. Optimism, Vulnerability, and selfbeliefs as health-related cognitions - a systematic overview. Psychology Health 1994;9(3):161-180.
110. Department of Health. Patient choice. London: Department of Health. URL: www.dh.gov.uk/en/Healthcare/PatientChoice/DH_469. 2009. Accessed March 2009.
111. Glazebrook C, Sheard C, Winstanley L, Ndukwe G. Attitudes of infertile couples to a multiple birth: A review of the literature and results from a survey. Curr Issues Womens Health 2007;3(1):43-8.
112. Bergh C, Soderstrom-Anttila V, Selbing A, Aittomaki K, Hazekamp J, Loft A, et al. Attitudes towards and management of single embryo transfer among Nordic IVF doctors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scandinavica 2007;86(10):1222-30.
113. Nardo LG, Gelbaya TA, Wilkinson H, Roberts SA, Yates A, Pemberton P, et al. Circulating basal anti-Müllerian hormone levels as predictor of ovarian response in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2009;92(5):1586-93.
114. Dias S, McNamee R, Vail A. Bias in frequently reported analyses of subfertility trials. Stat Med 2008;27(27):5605-19.
115. Agresti A. Categorical data analysis, 2nd edn. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2002.
116. Rabe-Hesketh S, Skrondal A, Pickles A. Maximum likelihood estimation of limited and discrete dependent variable models with nested random effects. J Econometrics 2005;128(2):301-23.
117. Steer CV, Mills CL, Tan SL, Campbell S, Edwards RG. The cumulative embryo score: a predictive embryo scoring technique to select the optimal number of embryos to transfer in an invitro fertilization and embryo transfer programme. Hum Reprod 1992;7(1):117-19.
118. Testart J. Cleavage state of human-embryos 2 days after fertilization in vitro and their developmental ability after transfer into the uterus. Hum Reprod 1986;1(1):29-31.
119. Giorgetti C, Terriou P, Auquier P, Hans E, Spach JL, Salzmann J, et al. embryo score to predict implantation after in-vitro fertilization - based on 957 single embryo transfers. Hum Reprod 1995;10(9):2427-31.
120. Munne S, Chen S, Colls P, Garrisi J, Zheng X, Cekleniak N, et al. Maternal age, morphology, development and chromosome abnormalities in over 6000 cleavage-stage embryos. Reprod Biomed Online 2007;14(5):628-34.
121. Hunault CC, te Velde ER, Weima SM, Macklon NS, Eijkemans MJ, Klinkert ER, et al. A case study of the applicability of a prediction model for the selection of patients undergoing in vitro fertilization for single embryo transfer in another center. Fertil Steril 2007;87(6):1314-21.
122. Granne I, Child T, Hartshorne G. Embryo cryopreservation: evidence for practice. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2008;11(3):159-72.
123. Parahoo K. Nursing research: principles, process and issues. London: Macmillan; 1997.
124. Kruegar RA. Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research, 2nd edn. London: Sage; 1994.
125. Sweet C. Anatomy of an online focus group. URL: www.quirks.com/articles/a1999/19991213.aspx?searchID=29309232. 1999. Accessed March 2009.
126. Shea V. The core rules of Netiquette. URL: www.albion.com/netiquette/corerules.html. 2005. Accessed March 2009.
127. Ritchie J, Lewis J (eds). Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2003.
128. Mellowood Medical. IDEAS - Fertility Clinic Management Software. URL: www.mellowoodmedical.com. 2009. Accessed March 2009.
129. Bird SM, Cox D, Farewell VT, Goldstein H, Holt T, Smith PC. Performance indicators: good, bad, and ugly. J R Stat Soc Series A Stat Soc 2005;168(1):1-27.
130. Gorber SC, Schofield-Hurwitz S, Hardt J, Levasseur G, Tremblay M. The accuracy of selfreported smoking: a systematic review of the relationship between self-reported and cotinineassessed smoking status. Nicotine Tobacco Res 2009;11(1):12-24.
131. Teddlie C, Tashakkori A. Foundations of mixed methods research: integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2009.
132. O'Cathain A, Murphy E, Nicholl J. Integration and publications as indicators of 'yield' from mixed methods studies. J Mixed Methods Res 2007;1(1):147-163.