Skip to main content
. 2018 Jul 27;35(9):1545–1557. doi: 10.1007/s10815-018-1266-6

Table 3.

Positive and negative prediction values of prediction models employing time-lapse microscopy

Study Sample size (embryos) Single/multicenter Blastocyst formation Implantation AUC Externally validated Commercially available
PPV NPV PPV NPV
Meseguer et al. [45] 247 S 66% (52%)b 92% Y N
Conaghan et al. [31] 941 M 54.7% 73.7% Y Y
VerMilyea et al. [32] 375 M 37% 85% Y Y
Basile et al. [41] 1620 M 32% 83% Y N
Cetinkaya et al. [48] 3354 S 79.2% 86.2% N N
Milewski et al. [49] 432 S 90.7% 73.3% 0.813 Y N
Behr et al. [35] 216 M 51% 100% N Y
Milewski et al. [50] 410 S 46% 87.9% 0.703 N N
Motato et al. [51] 257[832]c S 90.9% 58.2% 0.596 N N
Liu et al. [52] 36[270]c S 50% 100% 0.783 Y N
Petersen et al. [33] 3275 M 36.17% 94.8% 0.745 Y Y
Carrasco et al. [53] 800 S 29% 90.5% N N

bThe number in brackets represents the PPV of the five-category model whereas the number outside brackets represents the nine-category model

cThe number in square brackets refers to the sample for the development of the algorithm, whereas the number outside square brackets refers to the sample of the test phase