Defining success in assisted reproduction

Single Embryo Transfer

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 231-240

  Bhattacharya, Siladitya ^a  

^a ABERDEEN MATERNITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 78650360646     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511545160.025     Document Type: Chapter

References (37)

1. J. A. Land and J. L. H. Evers, Risks and complications in assisted reproduction techniques: report of an ESHRE consensus meeting. Hum. Reprod., 18 (2003), 455-457.
2. J. K. Min, S. A. Breheny, V MacLachlan and D. L. Healy, What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? The singleton, term gestation, live birth rate per cycle initiated: the BESST endpoint for assisted reproduction. Hum. Reprod., 19:1 (2004), 3-7.
3. G. Griesinger, K. Dafopoulous, A. Schultze-Mosgau, R. Felberbaum and K. Diedrich, Is BESST (birth emphasizing a successful singleton at term) truly the best? Hum. Reprod, 19:6 (2004), 1239-1241.
4. M. J. Davies, J. X. Wang and R. J. Norman, Assessing the BESST index for reproduction treatment. Hum. Reprod., 19:5 (2004), 1049-1051.
5. J. Mant, Process versus outcome indicators in the assessment of quality of health care, Int. J. Qual. Health Care, 13:6 (2001), 475-480.
6. W. L. D. M. Nelen, R. P. M. G. Hermens, S. M. Mourad etal., Monitoring reproductive health in Europe: what are the best indicators of reproductive health? A need for evidence-based quality indicators of reproductive health care. Hum. Reprod., 22:4 (2007), 916- 918.
7. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Fertility: Assessment and treatment for people with fertility problems. National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health. Commissioned by NICE, London (2004). www.nice.gov.uk.
8. H. R. Rubin, P. Pronovost and G. B. Diette, From a process of care to a measure; the development and testing of a quality indicator. Int. J. Qual. Health Care, 13 (2001), 489-496.
9. J. A. Land and J. L. H. Evers, Defining outcome in ART: a Gordian knot of safety, efficacy and quality. Hum. Reprod., 19:5 (2004), 1046-1048.
10. L. A. Schieve and M. A. Reynolds, Challenges in measuring and reporting success rates for assisted reproductive technology treatments: what is optimal? Hum. Reprod, 19:4 (2004), 778-82.
11. W. Buckett and S. L. Tan, The importance of informed choice. Hum. Reprod., 19:5 (2004), 1043-1045.
12. R. P Dickey, B. M. Sartor and R. Pyrzak, No single outcome measure is satisfactory when evaluating success in assisted reproduction; both twin births and singleton births should be counted as successes. Hum. Reprod., 19:4 (2004), 783-787.
13. I. E. Messinis and E. Domali, Should BESST really be the primary endpoint for assisted reproduction? Hum. Reprod., 19:9 (2004), 1933-1935.
14. U. B. Wennerholm and C. Bergh, Singleton live births should also include preterm births. Hum. Reprod., 19:9 (2004), 1943-1945.
15. A. Pinborg, A. Loft, L. Schmidt and A. N. Andersen, Attitudes of IVF/ICSI-twin mothers towards twins and single embryo transfer. Hum. Reprod., 18:3 (2003), 621-627.
16. J. Lumley, Defining the problem: the epidemiology of preterm birth. BJOG, 110:Suppl. 20 (2003), 3-7.
17. J. Moutquin, Classification and heterogeneity of preterm birth. BJOG, 110:Suppl. 20 (2003), 30-33.
18. L. A. Schieve, S. F. Meikle, C. Ferre et al., Low and very low birth weight in infants conceived with use of assisted reproductive technology. N. Engl. J. Med., 346(2002), 731-737.
19. J. X. Wang, R. J. Norman and P K. Kristiansson, The effect of various infertility treatments on the risk of preterm birth. Hum. Reprod., 17 (2002), 945-949.
20. M. O. Gardner, R. L. Goldenberg, S. P Cliver et al., The origin and outcome of preterm twin pregnancies. Obstet. Gynecol., 85 (1995), 553-557.
21. A. Vail and E. Gardner, Common statistical errors in the design and analysis of subfertility trials. Hum. Reprod., 18 (2003), 1000-1004.
22. A. Nyboe Andersen, L. Gianaroli and K. G. Nygren, European IVF-monitoring programme European Society of Human Reproduction, and Embryology. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2000. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE Hum. Reprod., 19:3 (2004), 490-503.
23. C. Hyden-Granskog and A. Tiitinen, Single embryo transfer in clinical practice. Hum. Fertil. (camb), 7:3 (2004), 175-182.
24. A. Pinborg, A. Loft, S. Siebe and A. N. Andersen, Is there a single ‘parameter of excellence’? Hum. Reprod., 19:5 (2004), 1052-1054.
25. A. Tiitinen, C. Hyden-Granskog and M. Gissler, The value of cryopresentation on cumulative pregnancy rates per single oocyte retrieval should not be forgotten. Hum. Reprod, 19:11 (2004), 2439-2441.
26. M. Germond, F. Urner, A. Chanson et al., The cumulated singleton/twin delivery rates per oocyte pick-up: the CUSIDERA and CUTWIDERA. Hum. Reprod., 19:11 (2004), 2442-2444.
27. M. Senat, P. Ancel, M. H. Bouvier-Colle and G. Breart, How does multiple pregnancy affect maternal morbidity and mortality? Clin. Obstet. Gynecol., 41 (1998), 7883.
28. R. B. Russell, J. R. Petrinin and K. Damus, The changing epidemiology of multiple births in the United States. Obstet. Gynecol., 101 (2003), 129-135.
29. J. Hazekamp, C. Bergh, U. B. Wennerholm et al., Avoiding multiple pregnancies in ART, consideration of new strategies. Hum. Reprod., 15:6 (2000), 1217-1219.
30. J. Goldfarb, D. J. Kinzer, M. Boyle and D. Kurit, Attitudes of in vitro fertilisation and intrauterine insemination couples towards multiple gestation pregnancy and multifetal pregnancy reduction. Fertil. Steril., 65 (1996), 815-820.
31. N. Gleicher, D. P Campbell, C. L. Chan etal., The desire for multiple births in couples with infertility problems contradicts present practice patterns. Hum. Reprod., 10 (1995), 1079-1084.
32. S. Murray, A. Shetty, A. Rattray, V Taylor and S. Bhat- tacharya, A randomized comparison of alternative methods of information provision on the acceptability of elective single embryo transfer. Hum. Reprod., 19:4 (2004), 911-916.
33. T. J. Child, A. M. Henderson and S. L. Tan, The desire for multiple pregnancy in male and female infertility patients. Hum. Reprod., 19 (2004), 558-561.
34. G. S. Scotland, P. McNamee, V. Peddie and S. Bhat- tacharya, Safety versus success in elective single embryo transfer: women’s preferences for outcomes of IVF. BJOG, 114:8 (2007), 977-983.
35. S. Bhattacharya and A. Templeton, Redefining success in the context of elective single embryo transfer: evidence, intuition and financial reality. Hum. Reprod., 19:9 (2004), 1939-1942.
36. P. Braude, Report of the Expert Group on Multiple Births After IVF. One child at a time - reducing multiple births after IVF (2006). www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/MBSET_report_Final_Dec_06.pdf (accessed August 3, 2007).
37. E. M. E. W. Heijnen, N. S. Macklon andB. C. J. M. Fauser, The next step to improving outcomes of IVF: consider the whole treatment. Hum. Reprod., 19:9 (2004), 1936-1938.