Skip Navigation

Human Reproduction 2005 20(1):1-3; doi:10.1093/humrep/deh649
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Barlow, D. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Barlow, D. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction vol. 20 no. 1 © European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology 2005; all rights reserved

Editorial

The debate on single embryo transfer in IVF. How will today's arguments be viewed from the perspective of 2020?

David H. Barlow

Editor-in-Chief

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Month by month the leading journals in reproductive medicine and science seek to publish innovative studies on cutting edge work relating to assisted reproduction. Many of these studies, whilst attracting scientific excitement and interest, do not directly feed into clinical care, and where there is clinical impact it is usually for a minority of IVF patients. An example of the latter might be the many innovations in preimplantation genetic diagnosis. It is obvious that mainstream clinical IVF is built on foundations of extensive and ongoing scientific study which, over time, produces small adjustments to practice, but I would suggest that clinical IVF has been fundamentally influenced by a series of innovations that have become incorporated into core IVF practice and have become so basic to everyday work that they can seem almost ordinary to those who did not use them before their introduction.

 Assisted reproduction is young enough that many . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JAMAHome page
R. J. Stillman
A 47-Year-Old Woman With Fertility Problems Who Desires a Multiple Pregnancy
JAMA, February 28, 2007; 297(8): 858 - 867.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
N. Gleicher and D. Barad
The relative myth of elective single embryo transfer
Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2006; 21(6): 1337 - 1344.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
E. G. Papanikolaou, M. Camus, E. M. Kolibianakis, L. Van Landuyt, A. Van Steirteghem, and P. Devroey
In vitro fertilization with single blastocyst-stage versus single cleavage-stage embryos.
N. Engl. J. Med., March 16, 2006; 354(11): 1139 - 1146.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
S. Munne
Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for translocations.
Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2006; 21(3): 839 - 840.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M. Sugiura-Ogasawara
Reply to: Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for translocations
Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2006; 21(3): 840 - 840.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
R. P. Dickey and R. Pyrzak
Preimplantation genetic screening will play a dominant role in selecting embryos for single embryo transfer
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2005; 20(10): 2978 - 2978.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
D. H. Barlow
Reply to: 'Preimplantation genetic screening will play a dominant role in selecting embryos for single embryo transfer'
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2005; 20(10): 2979 - 2979.
[Full Text] [PDF]