Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 10/2020

01-10-2020 | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Machine learning vs. classic statistics for the prediction of IVF outcomes

Authors: Zohar Barnett-Itzhaki, Miriam Elbaz, Rachely Butterman, Devora Amar, Moshe Amitay, Catherine Racowsky, Raoul Orvieto, Russ Hauser, Andrea A. Baccarelli, Ronit Machtinger

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 10/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To assess whether machine learning methods provide advantage over classic statistical modeling for the prediction of IVF outcomes.

Methods

The study population consisted of 136 women undergoing a fresh IVF cycle from January 2014 to August 2016 at a tertiary, university-affiliated medical center. We tested the ability of two machine learning algorithms, support vector machine (SVM) and artificial neural network (NN), vs. classic statistics (logistic regression) to predict IVF outcomes (number of oocytes retrieved, mature oocytes, top-quality embryos, positive beta-hCG, clinical pregnancies, and live births) based on age and BMI, with or without clinical data.

Results

Machine learning algorithms (SVM and NN) based on age, BMI, and clinical features yielded better performances in predicting number of oocytes retrieved, mature oocytes, fertilized oocytes, top-quality embryos, positive beta-hCG, clinical pregnancies, and live births, compared with logistic regression models. While accuracies were 0.69 to 0.9 and 0.45 to 0.77 for NN and SVM, respectively, they were 0.34 to 0.74 using logistic regression models.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that machine learning algorithms based on age, BMI, and clinical data have an advantage over logistic regression for the prediction of IVF outcomes and therefore can assist fertility specialists’ counselling and their patients in adjusting the appropriate treatment strategy.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Adamker G, Holzer T, Karakis I, Amitay M, Anis E, Singer SR, et al. Prediction of shigellosis outcomes in Israel using machine learning classifiers. Epidemiol Infect. 2018;146(11):1445–51.CrossRef Adamker G, Holzer T, Karakis I, Amitay M, Anis E, Singer SR, et al. Prediction of shigellosis outcomes in Israel using machine learning classifiers. Epidemiol Infect. 2018;146(11):1445–51.CrossRef
2.
3.
go back to reference Jovic S, Miljkovic M, Ivanovic M, Saranovic M, Arsic M. Prostate cancer probability prediction by machine learning technique. Cancer Invest. 2017;35(10):647–51.CrossRef Jovic S, Miljkovic M, Ivanovic M, Saranovic M, Arsic M. Prostate cancer probability prediction by machine learning technique. Cancer Invest. 2017;35(10):647–51.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Obermeyer Z, Emanuel EJ. Predicting the future - big data, machine learning, and clinical medicine. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(13):1216–9.CrossRef Obermeyer Z, Emanuel EJ. Predicting the future - big data, machine learning, and clinical medicine. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(13):1216–9.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Blank C, Wildeboer RR, DeCroo I, Tilleman K, Weyers B, de Sutter P, et al. Prediction of implantation after blastocyst transfer in in vitro fertilization: a machine-learning perspective. Fertil Steril. 2019;111(2):318–26.CrossRef Blank C, Wildeboer RR, DeCroo I, Tilleman K, Weyers B, de Sutter P, et al. Prediction of implantation after blastocyst transfer in in vitro fertilization: a machine-learning perspective. Fertil Steril. 2019;111(2):318–26.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Guvenir HA, Misirli G, Dilbaz S, Ozdegirmenci O, Demir B, Dilbaz B. Estimating the chance of success in IVF treatment using a ranking algorithm. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2015;53(9):911–20.CrossRef Guvenir HA, Misirli G, Dilbaz S, Ozdegirmenci O, Demir B, Dilbaz B. Estimating the chance of success in IVF treatment using a ranking algorithm. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2015;53(9):911–20.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Hafiz P, Nematollahi M, Boostani R, Namavar JB. Predicting implantation outcome of in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection using data mining techniques. Int J Fertil Steril. 2017;11(3):184–90.PubMedPubMedCentral Hafiz P, Nematollahi M, Boostani R, Namavar JB. Predicting implantation outcome of in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection using data mining techniques. Int J Fertil Steril. 2017;11(3):184–90.PubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Uyar A, Bener A, Ciray HN. Predictive modeling of implantation outcome in an in vitro fertilization setting: an application of machine learning methods. Med Decis Making. 2015;35(6):714–25.CrossRef Uyar A, Bener A, Ciray HN. Predictive modeling of implantation outcome in an in vitro fertilization setting: an application of machine learning methods. Med Decis Making. 2015;35(6):714–25.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Vogiatzi P, Pouliakis A, Siristatidis C. An artificial neural network for the prediction of assisted reproduction outcome. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36(7):1441–8.CrossRef Vogiatzi P, Pouliakis A, Siristatidis C. An artificial neural network for the prediction of assisted reproduction outcome. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36(7):1441–8.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Khosravi P, Kazemi E, Zhan Q, Malmsten JE, Toschi M, Zisimopoulos P, et al. Deep learning enables robust assessment and selection of human blastocysts after in vitro fertilization. NPJ Digit Med. 2019;2:21.CrossRef Khosravi P, Kazemi E, Zhan Q, Malmsten JE, Toschi M, Zisimopoulos P, et al. Deep learning enables robust assessment and selection of human blastocysts after in vitro fertilization. NPJ Digit Med. 2019;2:21.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Manna C, Nanni L, Lumini A, Pappalardo S. Artificial intelligence techniques for embryo and oocyte classification. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;26(1):42–9.CrossRef Manna C, Nanni L, Lumini A, Pappalardo S. Artificial intelligence techniques for embryo and oocyte classification. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;26(1):42–9.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Martinez RM, Baccarelli AA, Liang L, Dioni L, Mansur A, Adir M, et al. Body mass index in relation to extracellular vesicle-linked microRNAs in human follicular fluid. Fertil Steril. 2019;112(2):387–96 e3.CrossRef Martinez RM, Baccarelli AA, Liang L, Dioni L, Mansur A, Adir M, et al. Body mass index in relation to extracellular vesicle-linked microRNAs in human follicular fluid. Fertil Steril. 2019;112(2):387–96 e3.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Machtinger R, Gaskins AJ, Racowsky C, Mansur A, Adir M, Baccarelli AA, et al. Urinary concentrations of biomarkers of phthalates and phthalate alternatives and IVF outcomes. Environ Int. 2018;111:23–31.CrossRef Machtinger R, Gaskins AJ, Racowsky C, Mansur A, Adir M, Baccarelli AA, et al. Urinary concentrations of biomarkers of phthalates and phthalate alternatives and IVF outcomes. Environ Int. 2018;111:23–31.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Cross SS, Harrison RF, Kennedy RL. Introduction to neural networks. Lancet. 1995;346(8982):1075–9.CrossRef Cross SS, Harrison RF, Kennedy RL. Introduction to neural networks. Lancet. 1995;346(8982):1075–9.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Robnik Šikonja M, Kononenk I. An adaptation of relief for attribute estimation in regression. In: Fisher DH (editor). Machine Learning: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference; 1997 July 8-12; Nashville, (TN): Morgan Kaufmann, 1997: 296-304. Robnik Šikonja M, Kononenk I. An adaptation of relief for attribute estimation in regression. In: Fisher DH (editor). Machine Learning: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference; 1997 July 8-12; Nashville, (TN): Morgan Kaufmann, 1997: 296-304.
16.
go back to reference Ratna MB, Bhattacharya S, Abdulrahim B, McLernon DJ. A systematic review of the quality of clinical prediction models in in vitro fertilisation. Hum Reprod. 2020;35(1):100–16.CrossRef Ratna MB, Bhattacharya S, Abdulrahim B, McLernon DJ. A systematic review of the quality of clinical prediction models in in vitro fertilisation. Hum Reprod. 2020;35(1):100–16.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Curchoe CL, Bormann CL. Artificial intelligence and machine learning for human reproduction and embryology presented at ASRM and ESHRE 2018. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36(4):591–600.CrossRef Curchoe CL, Bormann CL. Artificial intelligence and machine learning for human reproduction and embryology presented at ASRM and ESHRE 2018. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36(4):591–600.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Siristatidis C, Vogiatzi P, Pouliakis A, Trivella M, Papantoniou N, Bettocchi S. Predicting IVF outcome: a proposed web-based system using artificial intelligence. In Vivo. 2016;30(4):507–12.PubMed Siristatidis C, Vogiatzi P, Pouliakis A, Trivella M, Papantoniou N, Bettocchi S. Predicting IVF outcome: a proposed web-based system using artificial intelligence. In Vivo. 2016;30(4):507–12.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Machine learning vs. classic statistics for the prediction of IVF outcomes
Authors
Zohar Barnett-Itzhaki
Miriam Elbaz
Rachely Butterman
Devora Amar
Moshe Amitay
Catherine Racowsky
Raoul Orvieto
Russ Hauser
Andrea A. Baccarelli
Ronit Machtinger
Publication date
01-10-2020
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 10/2020
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01908-1

Other articles of this Issue 10/2020

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 10/2020 Go to the issue