Shrestha D, La X, Feng HL. Comparison of different stimulation protocols used in in vitro fertilization: a review. Ann Transl Med. 2015;3(10):137. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2305-5839.2015.04.09.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Scott RT Jr, Upham KM, Forman EJ, Zhao T, Treff NR. Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):624–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.039.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Forman EJ, Hong KH, Ferry KM, Tao X, Taylor D, Levy B, Treff NR, Scott RT Jr. In vitro fertilization with single euploid blastocyst transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(1):100-107.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.056.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Wei D, Liu JY, Sun Y, et al. Frozen versus fresh single blastocyst transfer in ovulatory women: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Lancet. 2019;393:1310–8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Practice Committee for the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technologies. Guidance on the limits to the number of embryos to transfer: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2021;116(3):651–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.06.050.

Article  Google Scholar 

Kosasa TS, McNamee PI, Morton C, et al. Pregnancy rates after transfer of cryopreserved blastocysts cultured in a sequential media. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:2035–9.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ding J, Pry M, Rana N, Dmowski WP. Improved outcome of frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer with Menozo’s twostep thawing compared to the stepwise thawing protocol. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2004;21:203–10.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Provoost V, Pennings G, De Sutter P, Gerris J, Van de Velde A, Dhont M. Reflections by patients who undergo IVF on the use of their supernumerary embryos for science. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;20(7):880–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.03.009.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Wånggren K, Alden J, Bergh T, Skoog Svanberg A. Attitudes towards embryo donation among infertile couples with frozen embryos. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(9):2432–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det252.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Annas GJ. Ulysses and the fate of frozen embryos–reproduction, research, or destruction? N Engl J Med. 2000;343(5):373–6. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM200008033430519.

Hoffman DI, Zellman GL, Fair CC, Mayer JF, Zeitz JG, Gibbons WE, Turner TG Jr. Society for assisted Reproduction Technology (SART) and RAND. Cryopreserved embryos in the United States and their availability for research. Fertil Steril. 2003;79(5):1063–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(03)00172-9.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Lomax GP, Trounson AO. Correcting misperceptions about cryopreserved embryos and stem cell research. Nat Biotechnol. 2013;31(4):288–90. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2541.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Christianson MS, Stern JE, Sun F, Zhang H, Styer AK, Vitek W, Polotsky AJ. Embryo cryopreservation and utilization in the United States from 2004–2013. F S Rep. 2020;1(2):71–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xfre.2020.05.010.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Lyerly AD, Steinhauser K, Voils C, et al. Fertility patients’ views about frozen embryo disposition: results of a multi-institutional U.S. survey. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(2):499–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.10.015.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

de Lacey S. Parent identity and ‘virtual’ children: why patients discard rather than donate unused embryos. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(6):1661–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh831.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Fuscaldo G, Russell S, Gillam L. How to facilitate decisions about surplus embryos: patients’ views. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(12):3129–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dem325.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Provoost V, Pennings G, De Sutter P, et al. Infertility patients’ beliefs about their embryos and their disposition preferences. Hum Reprod. 2009;24(4):896–905. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/den486.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Newton CR, Fisher J, Feyles V, Tekpetey F, Hughes L, Isacsson D. Changes in patient preferences in the disposal of cryopreserved embryos. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(12):3124–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dem287.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Samorinha C, Severo M, Machado H, Figueiredo B, de Freitas C, Silva S. Couples’ willingness to donate embryos for research: a longitudinal study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95(8):912–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12900.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Nachtigall RD, Becker G, Friese C, Butler A, MacDougall K. Parents’ conceptualization of their frozen embryos complicates the disposition decision. Fertil Steril. 2005;84(2):431–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.01.134.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Bruno C, Dudkiewicz-Sibony C, Berthaut I, et al. Survey of 243 ART patients having made a final disposition decision about their surplus cryopreserved embryos: the crucial role of symbolic embryo representation. Hum Reprod. 2016;31(7):1508–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew104.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kirkpatrick BE, Rashkin MD. Ancestry testing and the practice of genetic counseling. J Genet Couns. 2017;26(1):6–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-016-0014-2.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Regalado A. More than 26 million people have taken an at-home ancestry test. MIT Technology Review. 2019. Feb. 11 [Cited 2020 August 31]. Available from:. www.technologyreview.com/s/612880/more-than-26-million-people-have-taken-an-at-home-ancestry-test/.

Carroll NM, Blum-Barnett E, Madrid SD, Jonas C, Janes K, Alvarado M, Bedoy R, Paolino V, Aziz N, McGlynn EA, Burnett-Hartman AN. Demographic differences in the utilization of clinical and direct-to-consumer genetic testing. J Genet Couns. 2020;29(4):634–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.1193.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Salloum RG, George TJ, Silver N, Markham MJ, Hall JM, Guo Y, Bian J, Shenkman EA. Rural-urban and racial-ethnic differences in awareness of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):277. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5190-6.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Roche K, Racowsky C, Harper J. Utilization of preimplantation genetic testing in the USA. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021;38(5):1045–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-021-02078-4.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Theobald R, SenGupta S, Harper J. The status of preimplantation genetic testing in the UK and USA. Hum Reprod. 2020;35(4):986–98. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deaa034.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Hipp HS, Crawford S, Boulet S, Toner J, Sparks AAE, Kawwass JF. Trends and outcomes for preimplantation genetic testing in the United States, 2014–2018. JAMA. 2022;327(13):1288–90.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Carpinello O, Bodily BM, Jahandideh S, Cebert M, Combs JC, Hill MJ, et al. Just over one-third of patients interested in embryo donation complete embryo donation. Fertil Steril. 2020;114:e102.

Article  Google Scholar 

Fuchs Weizman N, Yee S, Kazay A, K’Necht E, Kuwar AA, Maltz GM, Librach CL. Non-identified and directed embryo donation: a questionnaire study on donor and recipient perspectives. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2023;26(6):1417–28.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

de Lacey S. Decisions for the fate of frozen embryos: fresh insights into patients’ thinking and their rationales for donating or discarding embryos. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(6):1751–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dem056.

Article  PubMed