Madhur Hamine: Why IVF Success Rates Without Denominator Clarity Can Be Misleading?
Madhur Hamine, Business Consultant at IVF Business Consulting, shared a post on LinkedIn:
“‘78% IVF Success Rate’
A scientifically incomplete statement… unless properly defined.
In ART practice, outcome reporting without denominator clarity can be misleading.
Is the reported rate based on:
- Biochemical pregnancy?
- Clinical pregnancy?
- Ongoing pregnancy?
- Live birth rate?
- Per cycle started?
- Per OPU?
- Per embryo transfer?
- Fresh or frozen cycles?
- Donor or self gamete cycles?
- Age-stratified data?
A centre treating predominantly good prognosis patients will naturally report different outcomes compared to centres handling:
- Low ovarian reserve
- Recurrent implantation failure
- Revere male factor infertility
- Advanced maternal age
- Endometriosis
- Multiple failed IVF cycles
Globally, mature ART ecosystems are gradually shifting toward:
- Standardized reporting
- Patient-category stratification
- Cumulative live birth analysis
- Transparency in inclusion criteria
- Counselling-based communication rather than purely promotional metrics
From a medicolegal and ethical standpoint, aggressive success-rate-centric advertising may also create expectation mismatch in infertile couples.
In IVF practice, clinical governance, laboratory quality systems, patient selection, counselling standards, complication rates, compliance protocols and continuity of care are equally important quality indicators.
Perhaps the next evolution in IVF communication should be:
‘Outcome Transparency’ rather than isolated ‘Success Percentage’.
Your thoughts on standardising IVF outcome reporting in India?”
Kiran Doltade, Business Head at Oospheere IVF Services Pvt Ltd, shared Madhur Hamine’s post, adding:
“An important perspective for today’s IVF ecosystem.
IVF success rates without proper context, denominator clarity, and patient stratification can often be misleading. Every centre manages different patient profiles, making transparent outcome reporting far more important than isolated percentages.
The focus should move toward ethical communication, realistic counselling, laboratory quality, and cumulative live birth outcomes rather than only promotional success rates.
True trust in ART practice comes from transparency.”
Stay updated on all scientific advances in the field of fertility with Fertility News.
-
Jul 10, 2026, 15:37Paola Fasola: The Value of Time: Reflections from ESHRE 2026
-
Jul 10, 2026, 15:05Marco Zaccaria: Masterclass Organized by MSEC On The Basics of Hysteroscopy
-
Jul 10, 2026, 14:50The Prevention of Group B Streptococcal Disease in Perinatal Period – RCOG
-
Jul 10, 2026, 14:24Christopher Robinson: Myometrial Marking to Improve Suturing of the Uterine Incision at Cesarean Delivery
-
Jul 10, 2026, 13:28Emad Sedeek: PGT-A Is a Diagnostic Tool, Not a Guaranteed Pathway to Higher IVF Success
-
Jul 10, 2026, 13:10Nimra Zulfiqar: RCT Finds Dinoprostone–Laminaria Combination Reduces Cesarean Deliveries During Labor Induction
-
Jul 9, 2026, 18:08Camille A. Clare and Willie Underwood Ill Highlight Coding Changes for Every Stage of Pregnancy – ACOG
-
Jul 9, 2026, 15:53Practical Advice to Help Pregnant Women Stay Safe During Periods of Extreme Heat – FIGO
-
Jul 9, 2026, 15:42Serum Estradiol Decline Before Ovulatory Trigger and ART Outcomes – Fertility and Sterility