Skip to main content
. 2020 Nov;41(5):801–806. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.07.021

Table 2.

Claims made in relation to three add-ons on IVF clinic websites

Type of advertisement Number of websites
Assisted hatching
 Improves implantation chances/rates 9
 Improves pregnancy/clinical pregnancy chances/rates 5
 Evidence-based studies 7
 Insufficient/no evidence 1
 Reference to possible negative impact (e.g. on live birth) 0
Time-lapse embryo imaging
 Improves IVF success rates 11
 Improves clinical outcomes 3
 Improves implantation chances/rates 12
 Improves/increases ongoing pregnancy chances/rates 21
 Evidence-based studies/research/RCT 22
 Reference of studies 3
 Insufficient/no evidence 4
 Improves embryo selection – selection of ‘highest potential’ embryo 30
 Improves embryo culture and manipulation conditions 8
 Significant reduction of miscarriage/early pregnancy loss rates 10
 Higher percentage of genetically normal blastocysts – improves embryo potential 8
 Increases live birth rate 3
 Reduces preterm birth and very low birth weight 1
 Improves birth rates 1
 Supports better embryo development 11
 Reference to possible negative impact (e.g. on live birth) 0
PGT-A
 Improves pregnancy rates/likelihood 15
 Improves live birth rates 5
 Improves implantation rates 5
 Evidence-based studies/research 7
 Reference of studies 2
 Improves IVF success rates 4
 Reduces chance of miscarriage/minimizes chance of poor outcome 10
 Increases chance of having a healthy baby 3
 Does not increase overall chance of having a baby/no guarantee of a pregnancy 2
 Reference to possible negative impact (e.g. on live birth) 0

PGT-A, preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies; RCT, randomized controlled trial.