Back

Stage-Structured, Distributional Prediction of IVF Outcomes with Conditional Updating

Craig, A.; Wartschinski, L.; Eyre, M.; Davidson, I.; Christensen, M.; Wolfram, T.

2025-10-01 obstetrics and gynecology
10.1101/2025.09.27.25336680 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundCurrent IVF calculators provide either cumulative success probabilities, such as the CDC IVF Success Estimator [1] and OPIS calculators [2, 3, 4, 5], or stage-specific point estimates such as the Orchid Embryo Banking Calculator [6], but they do not quantify uncertainty and cannot incorporate patient-specific outcomes observed during treatment. ObjectiveTo develop a distribution-based framework that (i) produces full probability distributions at each IVF stage and (ii) allows downstream predictions to update when new stage outcomes are known. MethodsWe constructed a sequential probabilistic model using fresh, autologous IVF cycles from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) registry (2017-2018) [7] for egg retrieval, maturity, and fertilization, and integrated published clinical studies totaling over 435,000 additional observations for blastocyst formation, euploidy, freeze/thaw survival, and live birth after euploid transfer. Models were validated using 70/30 train-test splits with out-of-sample performance metrics. Egg retrieval is modeled with zero-inflated negative binomial (ZINB) regression; downstream stages apply sequential binomial filters. A "known value selection" mechanism conditionally updates predictions when observed counts are entered. ResultsThe model generates full probability distributions at each stage of IVF rather than point estimates. Multi-cycle modeling enables comprehensive family planning assessments, while known value updating on combined distributions maintains cycle-specific biology rather than averaging outcomes. When observed values are entered, downstream distributions update accordingly, helping to guide clinical decisions. Out-of-sample validation demonstrates minimal overfitting with train-test R2 gaps under 0.007. Distribution evaluation confirms well-calibrated prediction intervals (50% coverage: 50.2%, 80% coverage: 79.2%, 95% coverage: 94.9%). The model is available as a web application at https://www.herasight.com/ivf-calculator. ConclusionsA distribution-based, sequential framework with conditional updating addresses key limitations of existing calculators by providing uncertainty-quantified, stage-aware predictions that adapt to patient-specific outcomes observed during care. Study Funding/Competing InterestsFunded by Herasight Inc. Authors are employees or consultants of Herasight.

Published in Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.