ArticleTheScientificWorldJournal2011
Pregnancy rates with recombinant versus urinary human chorionic gonadotropin in in vitro fertilization: an observational study.
Article in TheScientificWorldJournal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing the efficacy of urinary and recombinant hCG on oocyte/follicle ratio to trigger ovulation in women undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2013Trial
- Human chorionic gonadotropin promotes murine Treg cells and restricts pregnancy-harmful proinflammatory Th17 responses.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Intrauterine administration of recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin before embryo transfer on outcome of in vitro fertilization/ intracytoplasmic sperm injection: A randomized clinical trial.Iranian journal of reproductive medicine · 2014Article
- A Multicenter, Randomized, Equivalence Trial of a New Recombinant Human Chorionic Gonadotropin Preparation versus OvitrelleJournal of human reproductive sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) demonstrated the equal efficacy of urinary human chorionic gonadotropin (uhCG) and recombinant hCG (rhCG) products in in vitro fertilisation (IVF). However, limitations inherent with RCTs necessitate the reinforcement of RCT results in real-life. We retrospectively analyzed pregnancies after treatment with rhCG and uhCG products (n = 391, and 96, resp.). We found that laboratory-verified pregnancy occurred more frequently in rhCG patients than in those on uhCG (43% versus 30%, P = 0.02). The association remains significant (P = 0.002) after its adjustment for clinical characteristics. The prevalence of laboratory-verified pregnancies was higher with GnRH agonist use (P = 0.012) and BMI under 30 kg/m(2) (P = 0.053) while decreased the age (P = 0.014) and the number of previous failed attempts (P = 0.08). Similar (but not significant) trends were observed with rates of pregnancy filled the 24th week. These results reinforce RCTs supporting the notion that rhCG is more efficient as uhCG during IVF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.