IVF births and pregnancies: an exploration of two methods of assessment using life-table analysis
Other
OA: closed
AI-generated summary
This study compared hazard and fecundability rates using life-table analysis in an Ontario IVF clinic, concluding that while both are valid for prospective patients, fecundability is the more appropriate index for program comparisons.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
PURPOSE: Our purpose was to explore two methods of expressing the performance of IVF programs.
METHODS: Using life-table methods, hazard and cure rates and a "monthly fecundability rate" were calculated for an Ontario IVF clinic. The rates were evaluated for their meaningfulness as indicators of the clinic's performance.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: While the hazard rate describes monthly fertility among those who will eventually become pregnant, the fecundability rate describes fertility for all patients who enter the program, making it the more appropriate index for program comparisons. However, from a prospective patient's perspective, both methods are valid indices for summarizing a program's performance.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
MeSH descriptors
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.
Source provenance
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-10-11T09:27:45.537177+00:00
- pubmed
- last seen: 2026-10-08T20:59:53.382863+00:00
- unpaywall
- last seen: 2026-10-14T06:23:58.021457+00:00