1. Conventional morphology performs better than morphokinetics for prediction of live birth after day 2 transfer 
Aisling Ahlstrom, Hannah Park, Christina Bergh, Ulrika Selleskog, Kersti Lundin 
Reproductive BioMedicine Online 
Volume 33, Issue 1, Pages (July 2016)
DOI: /j.rbmo
Copyright © 2016 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Terms and Conditions

2. Figure 1
Univariate logisitc regression analysis for prediction of live birth. Patient and treatment variables. NS = non-significant.
Reproductive BioMedicine Online  , 61-70DOI: ( /j.rbmo )
Copyright © 2016 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Terms and Conditions

3. Figure 2
Univariate logistic regression analysis for prediction of live birth. Conventional morphological variables. NS = non-significant.
Reproductive BioMedicine Online  , 61-70DOI: ( /j.rbmo )
Copyright © 2016 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Terms and Conditions

4. Figure 3
Univariate logistic regression analysis for prediction of live birth. Morphokinetic variables. Time from insemination (hours) to appearance of second polar body (tB2), PN appearance (tPNa), PN fading (tPNf); division to 2-cell (t2), 3-cell (t3), 4-cell (t4) and 5-cell (t5) stages. Calculated variables include time from polar body extrusion to PN appearance (tPNa-tPB2) and to 2-cell (t2-tPB2), PN duration (tPNf-tPNa), duration of the second cell cycle (t4-t2), time between 2-cell and 3-cell stages (t3-t2), synchrony (s2) of blastomere divisions in second cleavage cycle (t4–t3). Additionally, PN fading was used as an alternative start time to calculate time to each cell stage, t2-PNf, t3-PNf, t4-PNf and t5-PNf. NS = non-significant.
Reproductive BioMedicine Online  , 61-70DOI: ( /j.rbmo )
Copyright © 2016 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Terms and Conditions