{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,27]],"date-time":"2026-07-27T12:40:23Z","timestamp":1785156023826,"version":"3.55.0"},"reference-count":38,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"7","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,11]],"date-time":"2021-03-11T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1615420800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,11]],"date-time":"2021-03-11T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1615420800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Reprod. Sci."],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,7]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) is an intrigue condition during in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatments. The purpose of this retrospective study is to explore the value of next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) of trophectoderm biopsy in the clinical outcomes for RIF patients with advanced age. A total of 265 RIF patients, who underwent 346 oocyte retrieval cycles and 250 PGT-A cycles, were classified as two groups according to the female age, including &lt; 38 and \u2265 38 years old groups. The two groups were statistically comparable in baseline characteristics. The component of aneuploid embryos was significantly higher in advanced age group than in younger age group (68.9 vs 39.9%, <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic> &lt; 0.001). But there were no statistically significant differences in pregnancy rate (43.5 vs 64.7%), clinical pregnancy rate (39.1 vs 48.0%), implantation rate (39.1 vs 51.0%), and miscarriage rate (4.3 vs 7.8%) per embryo transfer (ET) between the two groups. Results suggest that the embryo-related factor plays a crucial role in RIF. Maternal age does not influence the implantation potential of euploid blastocysts. The NGS-based PGT-A involving trophectoderm biopsy is valuable for RIF patients of advanced age by improving their clinical outcomes. In conclusion, the NGS-based PGT-A involving trophectoderm biopsy may represent a valuable supplement to the current RIF management. Nonetheless, these findings should be further validated in a well-designed randomized controlled trial.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1007\/s43032-021-00519-0","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,11]],"date-time":"2021-03-11T19:02:45Z","timestamp":1615489365000},"page":"1923-1929","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":34,"title":["Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS)-Based Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy (PGT-A) of Trophectoderm Biopsy for Recurrent Implantation Failure (RIF) Patients: a Retrospective Study"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"28","author":[{"given":"Jing","family":"Tong","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Yichao","family":"Niu","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Anran","family":"Wan","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-7326-9049","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Ting","family":"Zhang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,11]]},"reference":[{"issue":"1","key":"519_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"35","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/deh579","volume":"20","author":"AR Thornhill","year":"2005","unstructured":"Thornhill AR, de Die-Smulders CE, Geraedts JP, Harper JC, Harton GL, Lavery SA, et al. ESHRE PGD Consortium \u2018Best practice guidelines for clinical preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)\u2019. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(1):35\u201348. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/humrep\/deh579.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"key":"519_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"409","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2013.12.006","volume":"28","author":"LT Polanski","year":"2014","unstructured":"Polanski LT, Baumgarten MN, Quenby S, Brosens J, Campbell BK, Raine-Fenning NJ. What exactly do we mean by \u2018recurrent implantation failure\u2019? A systematic review and opinion. Reprod BioMed Online. 2014;28:409\u201323. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.rbmo.2013.12.006.","journal-title":"Reprod BioMed Online"},{"key":"519_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"14","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2013.08.011","volume":"28","author":"C Coughlan","year":"2014","unstructured":"Coughlan C, Ledger W, Wang Q, Liu F, Demirol A, Gurgan T, et al. Recurrent implantation failure: definition and management. Reprod BioMed Online. 2014;28:14\u201338. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.rbmo.2013.08.011.","journal-title":"Reprod BioMed Online"},{"key":"519_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"284","DOI":"10.1007\/s10815-007-9147-4","volume":"24","author":"J Rinehart","year":"2007","unstructured":"Rinehart J. Recurrent implantation failure: definition. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2007;24:284\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10815-007-9147-4.","journal-title":"J Assist Reprod Genet"},{"key":"519_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"121","DOI":"10.1186\/s12958-018-0414-2","volume":"16","author":"A Bashiri","year":"2018","unstructured":"Bashiri A, Halper KI, Orvieto R. Recurrent implantation failure-update overview on etiology, diagnosis, treatment and future directions. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2018;16:121. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12958-018-0414-2.","journal-title":"Reprod Biol Endocrinol"},{"key":"519_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"376","DOI":"10.3390\/genes11040376","volume":"11","author":"A Idelevich","year":"2020","unstructured":"Idelevich A, Vilella F. Mother and Embryo Cross-Communication. Genes. 2020;11:376. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/genes11040376.","journal-title":"Genes."},{"key":"519_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"149","DOI":"10.1159\/000323500","volume":"133","author":"E Fragouli","year":"2011","unstructured":"Fragouli E, Wells D. Aneuploidy in the Human Blastocyst. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2011;133:149\u201359. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1159\/000323500.","journal-title":"Cytogenet Genome Res"},{"key":"519_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1923","DOI":"10.1093\/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136207","volume":"10","author":"Y Verlinsky","year":"1995","unstructured":"Verlinsky Y, Cieslak J, Freidine M, Ivakhnenko V, Wolf G, Kovalinskaya L, et al. Diagnosing and preventing inherited disease: pregnancies following pre-conception diagnosis of common aneuploidies by fluorescent in-situ hybridization. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:1923\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136207.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"issue":"2","key":"519_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"232","DOI":"10.1016\/S1472-6483(10)61715-4","volume":"6","author":"T Pehlivan","year":"2003","unstructured":"Pehlivan T, Rubio C, Rodrigo L, Romero J, Remohi J, Simon C, et al. Impact of preimplantation genetic diagnosis on IVF outcome in implantation failure patients. Reprod BioMed Online. 2003;6(2):232\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/S1472-6483(10)61715-4.","journal-title":"Reprod BioMed Online"},{"issue":"5","key":"519_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"628","DOI":"10.1016\/S1472-6483(10)61670-7","volume":"10","author":"EI-Toukhy T.","year":"2005","unstructured":"EI-Toukhy T. Influence of maternal age on the outcome of PGD for aneuploidy screening in patients with recurrent implantation failure. Reprod BioMed Online. 2005;10(5):628\u201332.","journal-title":"Reprod BioMed Online"},{"issue":"6","key":"519_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"848","DOI":"10.1016\/S1472-6483(10)60414-2","volume":"17","author":"C Blockeel","year":"2008","unstructured":"Blockeel C, Schutyser V, Vos AD, Verpoest W, Vos MD, Staessen C, et al. Prospectively randomized controlled trial of PGS in IVF\/ICSI patients with poor implantation. Reprod BioMed Online. 2008;17(6):848\u201354. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/S1472-6483(10)60414-2.","journal-title":"Reprod BioMed Online"},{"issue":"2","key":"519_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"224","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2008.05.005","volume":"140","author":"K Yakin","year":"2008","unstructured":"Yakin K, Ata B, Ercelen N, Balaban B, Urman B. The effect of preimplantation genetic screening on the probability of live birth in young women with recurrent implantation failure; a nonrandomized parellel group trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2008;140(2):224\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2008.05.005.","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"},{"key":"519_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"ACOG committee opinion No. 430: preimplantation genetic screening for aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 113(3):766-7. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AOG.0b013e31819e9f05.","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e31819e9f05"},{"issue":"1","key":"519_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"14","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/deq229","volume":"26","author":"G Harton","year":"2011","unstructured":"Harton G, Braude P, Lashwood A, Schmutzler A, Traeger-Synodinos J, Wilton L, et al. ESHRE PGD consortium best practice guidelines for organization of a PGD centre for PGD\/preimplantation genetic screening. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(1):14\u201324. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/humrep\/deq229.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"issue":"5","key":"519_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1400","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2012.11.041","volume":"99","author":"C Rubio","year":"2013","unstructured":"Rubio C, Bellver J, Rodrigo L, Bosch E, Mercader A, Vidal C, et al. Preimplantation genetic screening using fluorescence in situ hybridization in patients with repetitive implantation failure and advanced maternal age: two randomized trials. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(5):1400\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2012.11.041.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"519_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"314","DOI":"10.1002\/ijgo.12135","volume":"137","author":"S Hatirnaz","year":"2017","unstructured":"Hatirnaz S, Ozer A, Hatirnaz E, Atasever M, Ba\u015faranoglu S, Kanat-Pektas M, et al. Pre-\u00adimplantation genetic\u00ad screening\u00ad among\u00ad women\u00ad experiencing\u00ad recurrent\u00ad failure\u00ad of\u00ad in vitro\u00ad fertilization. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2017;137:314\u20138. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/ijgo.12135.","journal-title":"Int J Gynecol Obstet"},{"issue":"6","key":"519_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"693","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2017.09.001","volume":"35","author":"A Weissman","year":"2017","unstructured":"Weissman A, Shoham G, Shoham Z, Fishel S, Leong M, Yaron Y. Preimplantation genetic screening: results of a worldwide web-based survey. Reprod BioMed Online. 2017;35(6):693\u2013700. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.rbmo.2017.09.001.","journal-title":"Reprod BioMed Online"},{"key":"519_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"457913","DOI":"10.1155\/2014\/457913","volume":"2014","author":"E Greco","year":"2014","unstructured":"Greco E, Bono S, Ruberti A, Lobascio AM, Greco P, Biricik A, et al. Comparative Genomic Hybridization Selection of Blastocysts for Repeated Implantation Failure Treatment: A Pilot Study. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:457913\u20130. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1155\/2014\/457913.","journal-title":"Biomed Res Int"},{"key":"519_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Technology PCotASfRMatSfAR. The use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A): a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2018; 109(3):429-436. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2018.01.002.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2018.01.002"},{"key":"519_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"239","DOI":"10.1016\/j.tjog.2019.01.013","volume":"58","author":"C-I Lee","year":"2019","unstructured":"Lee C-I, Wu C-H, Pai Y-P, Chang Y-J, Chen C-I, Lee T-H, et al. Performance of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy in IVF cycles for patients with advanced maternal age, repeat implantation failure, and idiopathic recurrent miscarriage. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;58:239\u201343. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.tjog.2019.01.013.","journal-title":"Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"519_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Sawarkar S, Munne S. Chapter 13 - Genetic Selection of the Human Embryos: From FISH to NGS, Past and Future. Reproductomics. 2018:227\u201342. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/B978-0-12-812571-7.00014-9.","DOI":"10.1016\/B978-0-12-812571-7.00014-9"},{"key":"519_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"602","DOI":"10.3390\/genes11060602","volume":"11","author":"M Viotti","year":"2020","unstructured":"Viotti M. Preimplantation genetic testing for chromosomal abnormalities: aneuploidy, mosaicism, and structural rearrangements. Genes. 2020;11:602. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/genes11060602.","journal-title":"Genes."},{"key":"519_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"14","DOI":"10.1186\/s13039-017-0315-7","volume":"10","author":"H-H Lai","year":"2017","unstructured":"Lai H-H, Chuang T-H, Wong L-K, Lee M-J, Hsieh C-L, Wang H-L, et al. Identification of mosaic and segmental aneuploidies by next-generation sequencing in preimplantation genetic screening can improve clinical outcomes compared to array-comparative genomic hybridization. Mol Cytogenet. 2017;10:14. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s13039-017-0315-7.","journal-title":"Mol Cytogenet"},{"issue":"4","key":"519_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"627","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2017.12.017","volume":"109","author":"J Friedenthal","year":"2018","unstructured":"Friedenthal J, Maxwell SM, Munne S, Kramer Y, McCulloh DH, McCaffrey C, et al. Next generation sequencing for preimplantation genetic screening improves pregnancy outcomes compared with array comparative genomic hybridization in single thawed euploid embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril. 2018;109(4):627\u201332. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2017.12.017.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"519_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"\u0141ukaszuk K, Pukszta S, Wells D, Cybulska C, Liss J, Piociennik L et al. Routine use of next-generation sequencing for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of blastomeres obtained from embryos on day 3 in fresh in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertil Steril. 2015; 103(4). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2014.12.123.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2014.12.123"},{"key":"519_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Munne S, Grifo J, Alikani M, Cohen J, Tomkin G. Embryo morphology, developmental rates, and maternal age are correlated with chromosome abnormalities. Fertil Steril. 1995; 64(2).","DOI":"10.1016\/S0015-0282(16)57739-5"},{"key":"519_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"614","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2012.02.009","volume":"24","author":"B Ata","year":"2012","unstructured":"Ata B, Kaplan B, Danzer H, Glassner M, Opsahl M, Tan SL, et al. Array CGH analysis shows that aneuploidy is not related to the number of embryos generated. Reprod BioMed Online. 2012;24:614\u201320. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.rbmo.2012.02.009.","journal-title":"Reprod BioMed Online"},{"key":"519_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"403","DOI":"10.1007\/s10815-017-1060-x","volume":"35","author":"JD Kort","year":"2018","unstructured":"Kort JD, McCoy RC, Demko Z, Lathi RB. Are blastocyst aneuploidy rates different between fertile and infertile populations? J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018;35:403\u20138. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10815-017-1060-x.","journal-title":"J Assist Reprod Genet"},{"key":"519_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"38","DOI":"10.1186\/s13039-015-0143-6","volume":"8","author":"H Zheng","year":"2015","unstructured":"Zheng H, Jin H, Liu L, Liu J, Wang W-H. Application of next-generation sequencing for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of human preimplantation embryos. Mol Cytogenet. 2015;8:38. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s13039-015-0143-6.","journal-title":"Mol Cytogenet"},{"key":"519_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"379 e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2018.11.1103","volume":"220","author":"M Irani","year":"2019","unstructured":"Irani M, Zaninovic N, Rosenwaks Z, Xu K. Does maternal age at retrieval influence the implantation potential of euploid blastocysts? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220:379 e1\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ajog.2018.11.1103.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"6","key":"519_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1695","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2013.07.2002","volume":"100","author":"GL Harton","year":"2013","unstructured":"Harton GL, Munne S, Surrey M, Grifo J, Kaplan B, McCulloh DH, et al. Diminished effect of maternal age on implantation after preimplantation genetic diagnosis with array comparative genomic hybridization. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(6):1695\u2013703. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2013.07.2002.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"2","key":"519_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"520","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2010.04.003","volume":"95","author":"S Alfarawati","year":"2011","unstructured":"Alfarawati S, Fragouli E, Colls P, Stevens J, Guti\u00e9rrez-Mateo C. B.Schoolcraft W et al. The relationship between blastocyst morphology, chromosomal abnormality, and embryo gender. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(2):520\u20134. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2010.04.003.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"5","key":"519_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1700","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2009.10.015","volume":"94","author":"WB Schoolcraft","year":"2010","unstructured":"Schoolcraft WB, Fragouli E, Stevens J, Munne S, Katz-Jaffe MG, Wells D. Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(5):1700\u20136. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2009.10.015.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"key":"519_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Munne S, Wells D, Cohen J. Technology requirements for preimplantation genetic diagnosis to improve assisted reproduction outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2010; 94(2). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2009.02.091.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2009.02.091"},{"key":"519_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Gutierrez-Mateo C, Sanchez-Garcia J, Escudero T, Prates R, Ketterson K, Wells D et al. Validation of microarray comparative genomic hybridization for comprehensive chromosome analysis of embryos. Fertil Steril. 2011; 95(3). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2010.09.010.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2010.09.010"},{"issue":"12","key":"519_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2802","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/deu277","volume":"29","author":"F Francesco","year":"2014","unstructured":"Francesco F, Sara B, Anil B, Andrea N, Ettore C, Giuliano C, et al. Application of next-generation sequencing technology for comprehensive aneuploidy screening of blastocysts in clinical preimplantation genetic screening cycles. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(12):2802\u201313. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/humrep\/deu277.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"issue":"1","key":"519_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.1093\/humupd\/dmy036","volume":"25","author":"E Fragouli","year":"2019","unstructured":"Fragouli E, Munne S, Wells D. The cytogenetic constitution of human blastocysts: insights from comprehensive chromosome screening strategies. Hum Reprod Update. 2019;25(1):15\u201333. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/humupd\/dmy036.","journal-title":"Hum Reprod Update"},{"issue":"4","key":"519_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"943","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2011.12.048","volume":"97","author":"T Mamas","year":"2012","unstructured":"Mamas T, Gordon A, Brown A, Harper J, SenGupta S. Detection of aneuploidy by array comparative genomic hybridization using cell lines to mimic a mosaic trophectoderm biopsy. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(4):943\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2011.12.048.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"}],"container-title":["Reproductive Sciences"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s43032-021-00519-0.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s43032-021-00519-0\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s43032-021-00519-0.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,6,9]],"date-time":"2021-06-09T20:23:07Z","timestamp":1623270187000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s43032-021-00519-0"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,11]]},"references-count":38,"journal-issue":{"issue":"7","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,7]]}},"alternative-id":["519"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s43032-021-00519-0","relation":{},"ISSN":["1933-7191","1933-7205"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1933-7191","type":"print"},{"value":"1933-7205","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,11]]},"assertion":[{"value":"3 September 2020","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"25 February 2021","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"11 March 2021","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}}]}}