Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20091500›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Growth hormone for in vitro fertilization.

James Mn Duffy, Gaity Ahmad, Lamiya Mohiyiddeen, Luciano G Nardo, Andrew Watson

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
9.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

56 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 169 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Assisted reproductive technology: an overview of Cochrane Reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Considerations of Fertility in Elite Sportswomen: A Narrative Review.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

James Mn DuffyGuy's and St Thomas' Hospital, Westiminster Bridge Road, London, UK, SE1 7EH.
Gaity Ahmad
Lamiya Mohiyiddeen
Luciano G Nardo
Andrew Watson
Health Education North West · GBPennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust · GBSt Mary's Hospital · GBSt Thomas' Hospital · GBTameside Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn an effort to improve outcomes of in-vitro fertilisation cycles the use of growth hormone has been considered. Improving the outcomes of in-vitro fertilisation is especially important for subfertile women who are considered 'poor responders'.

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of adjuvant growth hormone in in-vitro fertilisation protocols. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Groups trials register (June 2009), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2009), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2009), EMBASE (1988 to June 2009) and Biological Abstracts (1969 to June 2009). SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials were included if they addressed the research question and provided outcome data for intervention and control participants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Assessment of trial risk of bias and extraction of relevant data was performed independently by two reviewers. MAIN

resultsTen studies (440 subfertile couples) were included. Results of the meta-analysis demonstrated no difference in outcome measures and adverse events in the routine use of adjuvant growth hormone in in-vitro fertilisation protocols. However, meta-analysis demonstrated a statistically significant difference in both live birth rates and pregnancy rates favouring the use of adjuvant growth hormone in in-vitro fertilisation protocols in women who are considered poor responders without increasing adverse events, OR 5.39, 95% CI 1.89 to 15.35 and OR 3.28, 95% CI 1.74 to 6.20 respectively. AUTHORS'

conclusionsAlthough the use of growth hormone in poor responders has been found to show a significant improvement in live birth rates, we were unable to identify which sub-group of poor responders would benefit the most from adjuvant growth hormone. The result needs to be interpreted with caution, the included trials were few in number and small sample size. Therefore, before recommending growth hormone adjuvant in in-vitro fertilisation further research is necessary to fully define its role.

Indexed as

Ovulation InductionChemotherapy, AdjuvantFemaleFertilization in VitroGrowth Hormone-Releasing HormoneHuman Growth HormoneHumansInfertility, FemaleLive BirthPregnancyPregnancy RateRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicGrowth Hormone-Releasing HormoneHuman Growth Hormone

Identifiers

PMID20091500
PMCPMC7058116
OpenAlexW2158113426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.