ArticleJournal of pregnancy2011
Birth defects in singleton versus multiple ART births in Japan (2004-2008).
Article in Journal of pregnancy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Birth defects after assisted reproductive technology according to the method of treatment in Japan: nationwide data between 2004 and 2012.Environmental health and preventive medicine · 2015Article
- Impact of assisted reproduction treatments on Spanish newborns: report of 14,119 pregnancies.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2013Article
- Congenital hypothyroidism after assisted reproductive technology in Japan: comparison between multiples and singletons, 2005-2009.International journal of pediatric endocrinology · 2013Article
- Concordance rates of birth defects after assisted reproductive technology among 17 258 Japanese twin pregnancies: a nationwide survey, 2004-2009.Journal of epidemiology · 2013Article
- Maternal age and birth defects after the use of assisted reproductive technology in Japan, 2004-2010.International journal of women's health · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the relative risk (RR) of multiple births for birth defects after assisted reproductive technology (ART) using Japanese nationwide data from 2004 to 2008 with singletons as the reference group. In multiples compared to singletons, the percentage of birth defects per pregnancy were significantly higher (RR = 1.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.60-2.13), the percentage of birth defects per live birth was not significantly higher (RR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.78-1.05 or RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.81-1.10), and the early neonatal mortality rate was significantly higher (RR = 2.68, 95% CI 1.52-4.70 or RR = 2.80, 95% CI 1.60-4.92). The early neonatal mortality per 10,000 live births was slightly higher in ART (5.09) than in the general population (3.86). We concluded that the impact of birth defects after ART would be larger in families with multiples compared to families with singletons, since the mean number of children would be larger in the former.
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.