IVF Success Estimator
CDC NASS 2022 · SART CORS 2022
Gaskins et al. AJOG 2023

Personalized IVF Success Estimates

This tool uses national U.S. data from CDC NASS, SART, and the Gaskins et al. prediction model to estimate your chance of a live birth with IVF. Estimates are adjusted for age, infertility diagnosis, BMI, prior IVF history, and transfer type.

2022: 435,426 ART cycles on 251,542 patients at 457 U.S. clinics produced 98,289 live-born infants — 1 in every 37 U.S. births.

Data Sources

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2022 Assisted Reproductive Technology National Summary. Atlanta, GA: US DHHS; 2024.
2. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. National Summary Report 2022. sartcorsonline.com.
3. Gaskins AJ, Zhang Y, Chang J, Kissin DM. Predicted probabilities of live birth following ART using US national surveillance data from 2016-2018. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2023;228(5):557.e1-e10.
4. Sekhon L, et al. Cumulative live birth rates with autologous oocytes plateau with fewer cycles for each year of age >42. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2023;40:2577-2585.
5. Luke B, et al. Cumulative birth rates with linked ART cycles. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2483-2491.
6. Practice Committee of ASRM. Guidance on the limits to the number of embryos to transfer. Fertil Steril. 2021;116(3):651-654.

Your Information

Age
35 years
253035404548
Egg Source
Prior IVF Cycles
Infertility Diagnosis Select all that apply. If unsure, leave blank for "unexplained."
Embryo Transfer Type
Genetic Testing (PGT-A)
Prior Pregnancies
Prior Live Births
BMI (Body Mass Index)
24 Normal weight
1718.525303545

How Your Factors Affect the Estimate

The base rate is for your age with own eggs, unexplained infertility, BMI 20-24.9, no prior IVF. Each factor adjusts the estimate.

Live Birth Rate by Age: Year-by-Year

Estimated per intended egg retrieval, own eggs — derived from CDC NASS 2022, SART CORS 2022, and Sekhon et al. 2023

Cumulative Success with Multiple Transfers

Estimated cumulative live birth rate after 1, 2, and 3+ embryo transfers within 12 months of retrieval

How were these estimates calculated?

Age curve: Year-by-year live birth rates were derived from CDC NASS 2022 age-group data (<35, 35-37, 38-40, >40) using monotonic cubic interpolation constrained to published group means. Ages 43-48 use disaggregated SART CORS data from Sekhon et al. (2023). The age-fertility relationship follows the quadratic decay model validated by Gaskins et al. (2023).


Diagnosis modifiers: Relative effect sizes are derived from Gaskins et al. (2023) Figure 2 showing predicted cumulative probabilities by diagnosis at age 35, and from Luke et al. (2012) NEJM reporting adjusted odds ratios by diagnosis category. DOR has the largest negative impact; male factor and ovulatory disorders have minimal impact on female-side success rates.


BMI modifier: Based on Luke et al. (2011) Fertil Steril and the Gaskins model, which used a restricted cubic spline for BMI. Effect is most pronounced at age <36 and diminishes with increasing age. The modifier shown applies the published relative effect scaled by age.


Prior IVF modifier: Return patients (prior failed cycles) have lower per-cycle rates than new patients, reflecting selection. Gaskins et al. reported separate models for new vs return patients. The modifier is derived from the ratio of return-to-new patient predictions at each age.


Fresh vs frozen: Freeze-all protocols now account for the majority of transfers. CDC NASS 2022 shows comparable or slightly higher LBR per transfer for frozen vs fresh among patients <38, with fresh slightly higher for older patients. PGT-A tested embryos are predominantly frozen transfers.


PGT-A: When euploid embryos are transferred, per-transfer LBR increases substantially. However, PGT-A does not improve cumulative LBR (per retrieval) because some embryos that would have implanted are discarded. The modifier shown adjusts per-transfer rates upward but flags this important distinction.


Cumulative estimates: Multi-transfer cumulative rates use the complement method: CLBR = 1 - (1-p)n, adjusted for declining marginal returns. This follows the methodology of Luke et al. (2012) NEJM as applied in the Gaskins model.


Limitations: These are population-level estimates. Individual outcomes vary based on factors not captured here, including AMH, AFC, sperm parameters, embryo morphology, stimulation protocol, clinic-specific expertise, and laboratory quality. This tool cannot replicate the precision of the CDC IVF Success Estimator, which uses unpublished model coefficients. All estimates should be discussed with a physician.