ClinicsDoctorsTreatmentsResourcesWho we areAsk PATHBelow-average outcomes — strongest for under-35s.
Based on age-adjusted HFEA live-birth data (2016–18) vs the UK national average.
Your question about this clinic travels with you — after sign-up it's waiting as the start of your first PATH conversation.
The reviews present a clinic with a clearly mixed reputation: pockets of strong, personalised clinical care sit alongside persistent and damaging administrative and communication failures. Many patients praise individual clinicians and nursing staff for clinical competence and empathy — most notably a consultant who listened to patients’ research and was willing to tailor medications and additional interventions, plus named team members (Pauline, Kelly, Eleanor and Dr Davies) and the theatre team who are described as reassuring, professional and effective. Where these individuals are involved, patients report feeling listened to, supported through scans and early pregnancy, and confident in the clinical decisions being made. At least one reviewer reports continuity of care into the first trimester and postnatal check-ins, culminating in an expected birth — evidence that clinical pathways can produce positive outcomes when well delivered. However, a recurring and dominant theme across the feedback is breakdowns in administration and patient-facing coordination. Multiple reviewers describe delays assigning a care coordinator, missed or unreturned calls, contradictory assurances from management, and formal complaints that were not acknowledged within the promised timeframes. Patient coordinators and support staff are repeatedly criticised for poor organisation and for adding stress at an already emotional time. Several reviewers explicitly refused to proceed with planned treatment because of this poor communication, and there are reports of refunds and complaint processes left unresolved. These failures undermine trust in the clinical service even where the clinical teams are strong. Emotionally, the clinic experience is uneven. Some patients emphasize caring, thoughtful nursing that put them at ease; others felt reduced to a number and deeply frustrated — language in the reviews ranges from gratitude to anger. That polarity suggests variability in patient experience depending on which staff handle a case and which location is used. There are references to different performance across sites (Sheffield staff praised; Leeds staff criticised), indicating inconsistent standards between locations or teams within the same organisation. In terms of practical pathways and outcomes, reviewers mention scans, consultations and at least one successful treatment outcome. The consultant’s willingness to alter protocols is viewed positively relative to prior experiences elsewhere where cycles were repeated without adjustment. Operationally, however, long waits for follow-up, unreliable callbacks, and poor complaints handling are repeatedly called out and appear to be the clinic’s principal weakness. In summary, this clinic can deliver competent, patient-focused reproductive medicine when senior clinical staff and specific nursing/theatre teams are involved. Its reputation is undermined by systemic administrative shortcomings: unreliable care coordination, inconsistent communication, and ineffective complaint and refund handling. Prospective patients are advised to weigh the potential for very good clinical care against the risk of stressful, time-consuming administrative issues and to seek clear assurances about communication and coordinator assignment before committing to treatment.
Source: HFEA regulated data. Best age band: Under 35. Weakest: 35-37.
No cost details listed for this clinic. Contact the clinic directly for an indicative quote.
Patient-review insights for this clinic aren't ingested yet. The HFEA-regulated outcomes shown elsewhere on this page are the most reliable signal until then.
We don't yet have a verified consultant list for this clinic. Browse the full doctors directory for GMC-registered specialists.
Written in PATH's voice from this clinic's published HFEA data — reviewed before publishing, never generated live.
Under 35 is CREATE Fertility Sheffield/ABC IVF Sheffield's strongest age band, while 35-37 is currently where results sit furthest behind the national figure. Overall, the clinic's live-birth rate is 36%, against a national average of 41% — a below average result on HFEA's rating. It's also a low-volume clinic, so smaller caseloads can shift more year to year than at a larger unit. Worth asking how the numbers have trended across recent reporting years.
It's a live-birth rate per embryo transferred, based on HFEA-verified regulated data covering 2016-18. Before setting this against another clinic's figure, two checks matter: whether both numbers are per embryo transferred or per cycle started, since they measure different things, and which years each figure covers, as clinics don't all update on the same cycle. It's a fair question to put directly to the clinic.
Worth covering: what's included in the quoted price, and what add-on costs are typical — freezing, medication and storage are the usual gaps; what were your live-birth rates for my age group in the latest HFEA data, since the headline figure here is below average and your band may read differently; and how many cycles like mine you carry out each year. A good consultant will welcome all three questions.
These answers use published data only — PATH personalizes once it knows your age, your numbers, and your story.
Ready to start your journey? Contact the clinic directly.
Ask PATH if this clinic fits youRequest ConsultationOpens in the app — you'll create a free account first.
Compare ClinicsfertilityPATH earns no referral fees. We recommend clinics based on data, not commercial relationships.
