Pre-conception counselling and management of expectations about chance of success of IVF/ICSI treatments is an integral part of fertility care. Registry data are usually used to inform patients about expected success rates of IVF/ICSI treatment, as these data should best represent real-world populations and clinical practice. In registries, the success rate of IVF/ICSI treatments is conventionally reported per treatment cycle or per embryo transfer and estimated from data for which several treatment attempts per subject have been pooled (e.g. repetitive IVF/ICSI attempts or repetitive attempts of cryotransfer). This, however, may underestimate the true mean chance of success per treatment attempt, because treatment attempts of women with a poor prognosis will usually be over-represented in a pool of treatment cycle data compared to treatment events of women with a good prognosis. Of note, this phenomenon is also a source of potential bias when comparing outcomes between fresh transfers and cryotransfers, since women can undergo a maximum of only one fresh transfer after each IVF/ICSI treatment, but potentially several cryotransfers. Herein, we use a trial dataset from 619 women, who underwent one cycle of ovarian stimulation and ICSI, a Day 5 fresh transfer and/or subsequent cryotransfers (follow-up of all cryotransfers up to 1 year after the start of stimulation), to exemplify the underestimation of the live birth rate, when not accounting for repeated transfers in the same woman. Using mixed-effect logistic regression modelling, we show that the mean live birth rate per transfer per woman in cryocycles is underestimated by the factor 0.69 (e.g. live birth rate per cryotransfer of 36% after adjustment versus 25% unadjusted). We conclude that the average chance of success of treatment cycles of women of a given age, treated in a given centre, etc., when conventionally calculated per cycle or per embryo transfer from a pool of treatment events, do not apply to an individual woman. We suggest that patients are, especially at the outset of treatment, systematically confronted with mean estimates of success per attempt that are too low. Live birth rates per transfer from datasets encompassing multiple transfers from single individuals could be more accurately reported using statistical models accounting for the correlation between cycle outcomes within women.

OBJECTIVE: The SART CORS database is an informative source of IVF clinic-specific linked data that provides cumulative live birth rates from medically assisted reproduction in the United States (US). These data are used to develop best practice guidelines, for research, quality assurance, and post-market surveillance of assisted reproductive technologies. Here, we sought to investigate the key areas of current research focus (higher-order categories), discover gaps or underserved areas of ART research, and examine the potential application and impact of newer ART adjuvants, future data collection, and analysis needs.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review (PRISMA guidelines) to quantify unique output metrics of the SART CORS database. Included were SART member reporting clinics: full-length publications from 2004 to 2021 and conference abstracts from 2015 to 2021, the two key timepoints when the SART CORS database underwent transformative shifts in data collection.
RESULTS: We found 206 abstracts presented from 2015 to 2021, 189 full-length peer-reviewed publications since 2004, with 654 unique authors listed on these publications. A total of 19 publications have been highly impactful, garnering over 100 citations at the time of writing. Several higher-order categories, such as endometriosis and tubal infertility, have few publications. The conversion of conference abstracts to full-length papers ranged from 15 to 35% from 2015 to 2021.
CONCLUSIONS: A substantial body of literature has been generated by analyzing the SART CORS database. Full-length publications have increased year over year. Some topic areas, such as endometriosis and tubal infertility, may be underrepresented. Conversion of conference abstracts to full-length publications has been low, indicating that more organizational support may be needed to ensure that research is methodologically sound and researchers supported to reach full publication status.

UNASSIGNED: The incident of infertility is continuously increasing. As a result, the demand for medical care such as assisted reproductive technology (ART) technology is equally increasing. In order to manage the growing data and information collected on ART, there is a need for a registry system can provide accurate statistics about activities and outcomes and ensure the quality control. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine and compare In vitro fertilization (IVF) and ART registries.
UNASSIGNED: This is a descriptive-comparative study in which data from the national ART registries of 14 selected countries in 2018 were collected. In this study, databases such as PubMed, Web of Sciences, and Scopus, as well as Google Scholar websites were searched.
UNASSIGNED: Important aspects of the registry were studied. One of the most important goals of these systems is to collect information about ART, as well as to monitor and report the results and implications, and also implement new care plans.
UNASSIGNED: A national registry helps to better understand the scope and the effect of assisted reproduction on the health of infertile couples. By this registry system, different countries can compare the data with other countries, allowing the improvement of techniques and the best possible care for patients.