Our results: published outcomes and success rates

NeoFertility, a restorative reproductive medicine clinic in Dublin, Ireland, led by Dr. Phil Boyle, Medical Director, has published five peer-reviewed cohort studies and case reports reporting live birth rates ranging from 32.1% adjusted after failed IVF to 41% crude in our most recent cohort and 53.6% adjusted at 24 months in our 2015 clinic audit. These are real numbers from real patients. Every figure on this page traces to a published paper or a clinic audit, and we say which is which.

Published cohort summary: NeoFertility live birth rates

So what do our outcomes actually look like across all published cohorts? The table below gives you the headline figures. Every row links to the full section below for the denominator detail, caveats, and clinical context.

NeoFertility live birth rate in 1,072 couples: Stanford, Parnell, Boyle (JABFM 2008)

Our earliest large published cohort is also our largest, and each of these 1,072 couples is a person we sat across from in a consulting room. Stanford JB, Parnell TA, Boyle PC. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 2008. DOI 10.3122/jabfm.2008.05.070239. PMID 18772291.

• Mean female age: 35.8 years; mean time trying: 5.6 years
• 24% had a prior live birth; 33% had prior ART
• 78% of conceptions occurred within the first 12 months
• 75% received clomiphene

This is the baseline against which every subsequent cohort is measured. When you see 53.6% from our 2015 clinic audit of 412 couples, what you are really seeing is a number that has held remarkably steady for nearly two decades.

NeoFertility success rate 2015: 412-couple Dublin cohort, 53.6% LBR at 24 months

Our 2015 dataset tracks 412 consecutive couples who began treatment at our Dublin clinic in that year. The average female age was 37, and 21% had undergone prior IVF. This cohort includes all couples, including those who stopped treatment early. These figures come from a clinic audit presented by Dr. Boyle and have not been published in a peer-reviewed journal. We say that clearly because it matters when you are reading outcome data.

The live birth rate improved with each milestone, which reflects something important about treatment: it is a process over time.

• 12 months: 35% adjusted live birth rate
• 18 months: 45% adjusted live birth rate
• 24 months: 53.6% adjusted live birth rate

Bear in mind, the crude live birth rate for this cohort is 32%. The adjusted rate uses life table analysis, the same method IVF researchers use, to account for couples who left the programme before completing treatment. Couples who stay the course see their chances improve with each balanced cycle.

Age-stratified results

• Under 35: 45% crude live birth rate
• Age 43: 10% crude live birth rate

Low AMH sub-cohort

Within the 2015 cohort, we identified 26 couples with AMH below 3.5 pmol/L, that is, severely reduced ovarian reserve. It is a small sub-group and has not been separately published. Even in this group, the outcomes were encouraging. For the full detail and clinical context, see our page on low AMH and ovarian reserve.

• 35% live birth rate
• Over 50% achieved a pregnancy
• 19% miscarriage rate
• Zero preterm deliveries
• Zero multiple pregnancies

Restorative reproductive medicine outcomes 2025: 187 couples, 41% crude live birth rate (JRRM)

This is the cohort that most closely reflects the couples walking through our door today. Boyle PC, Toth A, Minjeur M, Turczynski C. Journal of Restorative Reproductive Medicine, September 2025. DOI 10.63264/gejytw70.

• 249 couples had at least one RRM consultation; 187 committed to the treatment programme
• Average female age: 36.4; average male age: 38.0
• Average time trying: 32.2 months
• Prior reproductive history: 28% prior live birth, 30% prior miscarriage, 42% never conceived
• 19% (35/187) had previously had IVF, averaging 2.3 prior cycles
• Only 3% judged not medically eligible for RRM

• 75 singletons + 2 sets of twins = 79 confirmed babies
• Average birth weight: 3,422 g (7 lb 9 oz); average gestation: 39 weeks
• Time to conception for live-birth patients: 12 ± 8 months (longest: 32 months)

The numbers couples ask about most

A key finding from this Dublin cohort: what was labelled "unexplained infertility" dropped from 24% to just 1% after our full diagnostic workup. In other words, the causes were there. They simply had not been investigated thoroughly enough. This is what we mean when we say restorative reproductive medicine starts with a thorough assessment.

The diagnostic shift

So what does a thorough restorative workup actually find? This table is from Table 4 of the paper. It shows the same couples before and after our full multi-factorial assessment. The shift is striking.

The endometriosis row deserves a note. Table 4 of the JRRM 2025 paper shows the pre- and post-RRM diagnosis rates for the whole 187-couple cohort (10% rising to 25%). A separate figure from Table 5 adds context: of the subset of patients who underwent laparoscopy or hysteroscopy (roughly 40 to 43% of the cohort), 60% were surgically confirmed to have endometriosis. Surgical investigation can only diagnose what is visualised, which is why many cases remain unrecognised in standard fertility workups. Laparoscopy in our practice is a diagnostic and treatment tool used for patients where the assessment points to it, not a routine first step.

How our outcomes compare to IVF registries

The JRRM 2025 paper compares our Dublin cohort to the three largest IVF registries. These are not perfect apples-to-apples comparisons: our denominator is cumulative over 32 months; IVF registries report per-cycle or per-transfer. But they are the closest registry-matched comparisons available and the paper presents them transparently.

All three RRM figures below are crude live birth rates. The different percentages reflect different age ceilings used to match each registry's own reporting standard, not different methodologies on our side.

For context, SART single-embryo transfer LBR is 30.6% (Boyle's calculation from 2019 SART public registry data, Figure 1 of the paper).

Safety profile (JRRM 2025)

We know what these numbers represent for the person carrying a pregnancy, so we watch them closely.

Success rate after failed IVF: 403-couple Dublin cohort, 32.1% adjusted LBR (Frontiers 2018)

This cohort exists because so many couples arrive at our door already exhausted by IVF, and we wanted to understand what happens next. Boyle PC, de Groot T, Andralojc KM, Parnell TA. Frontiers in Medicine, 2018;5:210. PMID 30109231. DOI 10.3389/fmed.2018.00210.

Many of these couples in the Dublin cohort had been told they had no further options. By identifying and treating the underlying conditions that IVF had not addressed, nearly one in three achieved a live birth. The restorative approach looks for what IVF bypassed. When you treat what is actually wrong, conception through the body's own restored function becomes possible again.

Age-stratified live birth rate (Frontiers 2018, table 4)

Bear in mind, these figures are specific to the post-IVF cohort. The 38-40 age band shows 28.1% adjusted LBR and the over-40 group shows 27.0% adjusted LBR. The 27.0% figure is the correct number for over-40 couples in this cohort; some earlier summaries have incorrectly stated 27.4%.

Birth outcomes in this cohort

• Average birth weight: 3,374 g (7 lb 7 oz)
• 92% of babies born at 37+ weeks
• Singleton prematurity: 8.2% (6/73)
• Singleton low birth weight: 5.5% (4/73)
• Zero very low birth weight babies
• 1 twin pregnancy; no triplets (twin rate 1.4%)

Economic impact

Compared against the expected IVF-associated multiple pregnancy rate, the paper modelled cost savings of approximately GBP 205,672 from multiples avoided in this cohort alone. This figure applies Ledger 2006 UK per-multiple cost estimates to a counterfactual scenario. It is a healthcare-system figure, not a patient-level figure, and it reflects the downstream cost of IVF-associated multiples that restorative treatment avoids by conception through restored function.

The IVF benchmark from the paper itself

For patients aged 38 to 40 who had already had 2 failed IVF attempts, the published LBR after one more IVF cycle is 17.5%. Our adjusted LBR for the same age group in this restorative cohort is 28.1%. For a full discussion of how the restorative treatment plan works, including what is different from IVF, see our treatment page.

Recurrent miscarriage success rate at NeoFertility (2010 clinic audit)

In our 2010 clinic audit of couples who presented with recurrent miscarriage, 36 went on to conceive during treatment. Of those 36 couples, 29 (approximately 80%) delivered a live baby. This figure is specific to couples who conceived during treatment, not to all couples who came to us. We have also seen successful pregnancies in couples with a history of ten previous miscarriages. For the full denominator detail and current clinical context, see our recurrent miscarriage page.

Maternal and neonatal safety outcomes: 132 live births (2015 clinic audit)

Of equal importance to pregnancy rates is the health of mothers and babies. The following figures come from the 2015 clinic audit of 132 live births, presented by Dr. Boyle in a 2020 lecture. These are not peer-reviewed and are attributed accordingly.

Remarkably, in 132 live births from our Dublin clinic we had zero twins. The single multiple pregnancy was a triplet, delivered at 31 weeks 5 days by elective caesarean section; all three babies were healthy. For comparison, the CDC IVF comparator from the JRRM 2025 paper shows a singleton prematurity rate of 11.8%, and IVF has historically had a multiple pregnancy rate above 20%, now improving with single embryo transfer policies.

A note on the 4.2% preterm rate: this figure is from the 2015 clinic presentation. The JRRM 2025 peer-reviewed paper reports a separate figure of 4.0% singleton prematurity for the 2019 cohort. These are consistent, from different cohorts, but they are not the same number and should not be conflated.

DHEA for miscarriage prevention: NeoFertility peer-reviewed research

For women who have miscarried and are afraid to hope again, two peer-reviewed papers describe our research on DHEA in the context of restorative reproductive medicine.

The cohort study (Boyle P, Andralojc K, van der Velden S, Najmabadi S, de Groot T, Turczynski C, Stanford JB. Frontiers in Reproductive Health, 2024. DOI 10.3389/frph.2023.1321284. PMID 38264149) is a retrospective cohort of patients with low serum oestradiol during pregnancy, treated with a multifactorial protocol that included DHEA. The headline finding: DHEA supplementation reduced miscarriage from 45.5% to 17.5% (p=0.038). That is a statistically significant reduction with a low-cost supplement in a group at high miscarriage risk.

The case report (Boyle PC, Pandalache C, Turczynski C. Frontiers in Medicine, 2024;11:1358563. DOI 10.3389/fmed.2024.1358563) documents one woman's story in clinical detail, a 30-year-old patient (G6P1: one prior live birth, five miscarriages including a fetal demise at 24 weeks) with confirmed hypoandrogenemia (DHEA-S 1.8 µmol/L, against a normal range of 2.7 to 9.2). A multi-drug restorative protocol including DHEA, naltrexone, clomiphene, HCG, and progesterone resulted in a healthy live birth in November 2023 (6 lb 12 oz, delivered by elective caesarean section at 36 weeks).

These are two distinct papers. The cohort paper establishes the statistical pattern across a group. The case report traces that pattern through one patient, with the lab values and protocol transparent at every step.

Complex fertility case reports: published live births after failed IVF, POI, and recurrent loss

For three of the most complex presentations we see, very long-standing impaired fertility after multiple IVF failures, recurrent pregnancy loss with hormonal dysfunction, and premature ovarian insufficiency, we have case reports in the peer-reviewed literature.

16 years of impaired fertility after 8 failed IVF/ICSI transfers (2022)

Boyle PC, Stanford JB, Zecevic I. Journal of Medical Case Reports, 2022. DOI 10.1186/s13256-022-03465-w.

A 35-year-old woman, gravida 3 para 0, came to us after 16 years of impaired fertility. She had three recurrent miscarriages and had undergone 8 failed IVF/ICSI embryo transfers across 5 stimulated cycles. A thorough restorative assessment identified multiple previously undiagnosed conditions: a uterine septum, hypothyroidism, and a balanced chromosomal translocation. Following surgical correction and targeted medical therapy, she delivered a healthy male infant at 39 weeks by elective caesarean section (3,670 g, or 8 lb 1 oz).

DHEA in recurrent miscarriage with hypoandrogenemia (2024)

Described in full in the DHEA Research section above.

Premature ovarian insufficiency with FSH 97.7 (2025 poster abstract)

A 41-year-old woman with one prior live birth at 39 and one miscarriage at 41 came to us with premature ovarian insufficiency. Her FSH was 97.7 IU and her AMH was 0.07 pmol/L (0.0098 ng/mL). Using a tailored protocol featuring transdermal oestrogen (Estradot 100 mcg/24h), FSH normalised after three cycles. She conceived on cycle 5 with follicle stimulation and transdermal oestrogen, with ongoing pregnancy at the time of publication (EDD June 2025). Boyle PC et al., 2025 poster abstract. This case remains an ongoing pregnancy at the time of writing; outcome figures should not be presented as confirmed until a follow-up report is published.

How to read our fertility success rates

There are percentages and then there are people. Behind every statistic is a couple who came to us hoping for help, and that is worth keeping in mind.

We present our data honestly. The crude live birth rate includes every couple who started treatment, including those who stopped after one visit. The adjusted rate accounts for early departures using life table analysis, the same methodology used in IVF outcome research. Both numbers are real and both are valid. We present both so you can make an informed decision.

So what does this mean for you in practice? Treatment is a process over time. The data consistently shows that couples who stay the course and complete the full programme have the best outcomes. Whether our results are relevant to your situation depends on your individual assessment: your age, your hormonal profile, your prior history, and your partner's assessment too. We evaluate both partners. That is part of how the approach works.

Treatment is not a guarantee of success. But what we can do is give you a far more thorough picture of what is actually happening, and then target it precisely. If you would like to discuss how these numbers apply to your specific situation, book an initial consultation at our Dublin clinic. The initial fertility consultation is EUR 300 for 45 minutes, with a separate women's health consultation available at EUR 100 for non-fertility concerns.

For a broader overview of the restorative approach, including conditions beyond impaired fertility, see what is NeoFertility. For the three-phase treatment plan detail, see how our treatment plan works. For PCOS, endometriosis, and other conditions we treat, see the conditions hub.