IVF BIG DATA
Personalized Lab Report
Verify your email, tell us your lab name, then upload your clinic's embryo file. Review Outcomes-Grades scoring and validation, and receive a PDF report personalized for your lab. Analysis uses only your upload — historic master files are not merged.
1. Lab name and email verification
Enter your lab name and email, then confirm the 6-digit code we send. Upload unlocks after verification.
2. Upload embryo file
Upload a CSV or Excel file (.csv, .xlsx, .xls). Required: embryo age (numeric ~0–100) and lab grade (e.g. 4AB). Optional when present: lab location, patient ID, Age at TVA, cycle ID, date created. Column names can vary — we match headers and column content.
Drag and drop a file here, or click to browse
Complete email verification above to unlock upload.
How Outcomes-Grades scores were designed
The site uses an additions-only Outcomes-Grades score derived from Gardner morphology. Gardner expansion (the leading number in grades such as 4AB) is parsed for reporting but is not scored. The score sums day-of-biopsy points, ICM (first letter), TE (second letter), and a no-minus bonus. Maximum score is 24.
score = day_points + ICM_points + TE_points + no_minus_points
Weights prioritize biopsy day and ICM over TE: day 5 receives the largest credit, ICM A is worth three times ICM C, and TE contributes a smaller range. Any minus on ICM or TE removes the six-point “no minus” bonus.
| Category | Points |
|---|---|
| Day 5 | 10 |
| Day 6 | 4 |
| Day 7 | 0 |
| Category | Points |
|---|---|
| A | 6 |
| B | 3 |
| C | 0 |
| Category | Points |
|---|---|
| A | 2 |
| B | 1 |
| C | 0 |
| Category | Points |
|---|---|
| No minus | 6 |
| Any minus (−) | 0 |
Model validation and testing
Separately from the additions-only KPI score above, morphology features were evaluated against clinical pregnancy (IUP) on a historical FET morphology cohort. A logistic model was trained on single-embryo transfers (SET) so the outcome belongs to that embryo. The model score is 100 × P(IUP). This section summarizes discrimination and selection performance; it is supporting evidence for morphology–IUP association, not a bedside calculator.
Cohort
~7,113 FET rows
IUP ≈ 73%; SET train n ≈ 6,997
Validation
5-fold stratified CV
StratifiedKFold, out-of-fold predictions
Logistic AUC / AP
0.623 / 0.791
Heuristic AUC / AP ≈ 0.582 / 0.768
Top 10% selection
81.3% IUP
vs heuristic 78.1% (SET ranking)
| Feature | OR |
|---|---|
| Day 6 (vs day 5) | 0.59 |
| Day 7 (vs day 5) | 0.33 |
| ICM A (vs B) | 1.45 |
| TE A (vs B) | 1.10 |
| Minus present | 0.55 |
| Keep top | Logistic | Heuristic |
|---|---|---|
| 10% | 81.3 | 78.1 |
| 25% | 80.4 | 78.8 |
| 50% | 79.9 | 77.7 |
| 100% | 73.0 | 73.0 |
Informational only. Not a clinical decision device. Clinic protocols and physician judgment take precedence. The additions-only Outcomes-Grades KPI score used in charts on this page is not identical to the logistic 100 × P(IUP) model score.