ReviewObstetrics & gynecology science2026
Innovations in assisted reproductive technologies: evaluating efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes in female infertility.
Review in Obstetrics & gynecology science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A substantial proportion of patients with recurrent implantation failure treated with partner lymphocyte immunotherapy achieved live birth within 3 years after immunization.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This narrative review evaluates innovations in assisted reproductive technology (ART) for female infertility, focusing on efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes. The key objectives include synthesizing advancements such as artificial intelligence (AI)-driven embryo selection, preimplantation genetic testing (PGT), vitrification, and time-lapse imaging, along with their clinical applications. Evidence indicates that PGT can improve implantation and live birth rates per transfer in selected patient groups, that is, those with recurrent pregnancy loss or advanced maternal age. Evidence of AI-assisted selection is promising, but predominantly retrospective, with the potential to improve the efficiency of embryo selection, but has not yet been proven across a variety of clinical settings. However, safety concerns, including ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, multiple pregnancies, and potential long-term maternal and offspring health risks, persist. Critical reflections highlight ethical dilemmas (e.g., "designer babies", embryo disposition), psychological stressors for patients, and disparities in ART access due to socioeconomic factors. This review underscores the need for personalized protocols, robust longitudinal studies on child development, and equitable policy frameworks. These conclusions advocate for interdisciplinary collaboration to balance technological innovation with ethical integrity, psychological support, and global accessibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.