ReviewFertility and sterility2011
Recruitment challenges of a multicenter randomized controlled varicocelectomy trial.
Review in Fertility and sterility, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effect of Subclinical Varicocele on Pregnancy Rates and Semen Parameters: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Current urology reports · 2018Pooled it
- Osteoprotegerin is strongly associated with calcium and magnesium in seminal fluid but not affected by denosumab.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2026Article
- Surveys of clinician and patient attitudes to an add-on for in vitro fertilisation.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2022Article
- We need a prospective varicocelectomy trial.Fertility and sterility · 2014Article
- Microsurgical varicocelectomy: a review.Asian journal of andrology · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo review reasons for suboptimal recruitment for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of varicocelectomy versus intrauterine insemination (IUI) for treatment of male infertility and to suggest means for improving future study recruitment.
designSurvey of Reproductive Medicine Network (RMN) participating sites.
settingReproductive Medicine Network. PATIENT(S): None. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ascertain reasons for inadequate recruitment and suggest improvements for future varicocelectomy trails. RESULT(S): This study screened seven and enrolled three couples, with the first couple randomized on June 30, 2010. The study was subsequently stopped on March 30, 2011. The following themes were cited most frequently by sites and therefore determined to be most likely to have played a role in suboptimal recruitment: [1] men must be screened at the beginning of a couple's infertility evaluation, [2] inclusion of infertile women who had failed previous fertility interventions appeared to be associated with the couple's intolerance of a placebo arm, and [3] an apparent bias against the use of unstimulated IUI cycles indicated a prejudicial preference for surgical intervention in the male partner. CONCLUSION(S): Improved recruitment may be realized through screening infertile men as early as possible while minimizing study-related time commitments. Focused patient education may promote improved equipoise and acceptance of a placebo arm in male infertility studies. Creative approaches to implementing varicocelectomy trials must be considered in addition to having a network of motivated researchers who carry a high volume of possible study participants because very large numbers may need to be screened to complete the clinical trial enrollment.
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.