Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17054143›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Intra-uterine insemination for unexplained subfertility.

S M Verhulst, B J Cohlen, E Hughes, E Te Velde, M J Heineman

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01662180 (Predicting Ovarian Response in Artificial Insemination With Low Stimulation), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01662180 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2012, after this paper: background citation

Predicting Ovarian Response in Artificial Insemination With Low Stimulation

TypeobservationalSponsorIsalaRan2012 to 2015Enrolled510ConditionsSubfertilityArmsFollicle Stimulating Hormone
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 242 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Intra-uterine insemination for unexplained subfertility.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Surgery for tubal infertility.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Diagnosis and treatment of unexplained infertility.Reviews in obstetrics & gynecology · 2008
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

S M VerhulstRijksuniversiteit Groningen, Vijverlaan 4, Rotterdam, Netherlands. s.verhulst@wherever.nl
B J Cohlen
E Hughes
E Te Velde
M J Heineman
Houston Fertility Institute · USIsala · NLUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntra-uterine insemination (IUI) is a widely used fertility treatment for couples with unexplained subfertility. Although IUI is less invasive and less expensive than in vitro fertilisation (IVF), the safety of IUI in combination with ovarian hyperstimulation (OH) is debated. The main concern about IUI treatment with OH is the increase in multiple pregnancy rates.

objectivesTo determine whether for couples with unexplained subfertility IUI improves the live birth rate compared with timed intercourse (TI), both with and without ovarian hyperstimulation. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorder and Subfertility Group Trials Register (searched March 2005), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to November 2005), EMBASE (1980 to November 2005), SCIsearch and reference lists of articles. Authors of identified studies were contacted for missing or unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: Truly randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least one of the following comparisons were included: --IUI versus TI, both in a natural cycle; --IUI versus TI, both in a stimulated cycle; --IUI in a natural cycle versus IUI in a stimulated cycle; --IUI with OH versus TI in natural cycle; --IUI in a natural cycle versus TI with OH. Only couples with unexplained subfertility were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two review authors. Outcomes were extracted and the data were pooled. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were done where possible. MAIN

resultsIn the six trials where IUI was compared with TI, both in stimulated cycles, there was evidence of an increased chance of pregnancy (six RCTs, 517 women: OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.50). A significant increase in pregnancy rate was also found for women where IUI with OH was compared with IUI in a natural cycle (three RCTs, 415 women: OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.71). However, the trials provided insufficient data to investigate the impact of IUI with or without OH on several important outcomes including live birth, multiple pregnancies, miscarriage and risk of ovarian hyperstimulation. There was no evidence of a difference in pregnancy rate for IUI with OH compared with TI in a natural cycle (one RCT, 51 women: OR 4.05, 95% CI 0.39 to 41.87). No RCTs were found for the other two comparisons. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is evidence that IUI with OH increases the live birth rate compared to IUI alone. The likelihood of pregnancy was also increased for treatment with IUI compared to TI both in stimulated cycles. There is insufficient data on multiple pregnancies and other adverse events for treatment with OH. Therefore, couples should be fully informed about the risks of IUI and OH as well as alternative treatment options.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansInfertilityInsemination, ArtificialMalePregnancyPregnancy RateRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID17054143
OpenAlexW2131291068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.