SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013
Progestogen for preventing miscarriage.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.
- Progestogen for preventing miscarriage in women with recurrent miscarriage of unclear etiology.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Progestogen for preventing miscarriage in women with recurrent miscarriage of unclear etiology.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Progestogen for preventing miscarriage in women with recurrent miscarriage of unclear etiology.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Clomiphene and other antioestrogens for ovulation induction in polycystic ovarian syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Vitamin supplementation for preventing miscarriage.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Threatened miscarriage and recurrent miscarriage: Expert opinions on progesterone therapy and treatment challenges.Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Article
- Increased Live Birth Rate with Dydrogesterone among Patients with Recurrent Pregnancy Loss Regardless of Other Treatments.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Progesterone: A Steroid with Wide Range of Effects in Physiology as Well as Human Medicine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Investigation and Validation of Molecular Characteristics of Endometrium in Recurrent Miscarriage and Unexplained Infertility from a Transcriptomic Perspective.International journal of medical sciences · 2022Article
- Article
- Polymorphism, expression and structure analysis of key genes in the ovarian steroidogenesis pathway in sheep (Ovis aries).Veterinary medicine and science · 2021Article
- Cytokines, Hormones and Cellular Regulatory Mechanisms Favoring Successful Reproduction.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Review
- Baseline Levels of Serum Progesterone and the First Trimester Pregnancy Outcome in Women with Threatened Abortion: A Retrospective Cohort Study.BioMed research international · 2020Article
- Gene expression analysis of membrane progesterone receptors in women with recurrent spontaneous abortion: a case control study.BMC research notes · 2019Article
- Prophylactic Effects of Bee Venom Phospholipase A2 in Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Pregnancy Loss.Toxins · 2019Article
- Drug prescribing during pregnancy in a central region of Italy, 2008-2012.BMC public health · 2018Article
- The Adequate Corpus Luteum: miR-96 Promotes Luteal Cell Survival and Progesterone Production.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2017Article
- Live birth rates and safety profile using dydrogesterone for luteal phase support in assisted reproductive techniques.Singapore medical journal · 2017Article
- Recurrent pregnancy loss: current perspectives.International journal of women's health · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProgesterone, a female sex hormone, is known to induce secretory changes in the lining of the uterus essential for successful implantation of a fertilized egg. It has been suggested that a causative factor in many cases of miscarriage may be inadequate secretion of progesterone. Therefore, progestogens have been used, beginning in the first trimester of pregnancy, in an attempt to prevent spontaneous miscarriage.
objectivesTo determine the efficacy and safety of progestogens as a preventative therapy against miscarriage. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 August 2013), reference lists from relevant articles, attempting to contact authors where necessary, and contacted experts in the field for unpublished works. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing progestogens with placebo or no treatment given in an effort to prevent miscarriage. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN
resultsFourteen trials (2158 women) are included. The meta-analysis of all women, regardless of gravidity and number of previous miscarriages, showed no statistically significant difference in the risk of miscarriage between progestogen and placebo or no treatment groups (Peto odds ratio (Peto OR) 0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.24) and no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse effect in either mother or baby.A subgroup analysis of placebo controlled trials did not find a difference in the rate of miscarriage with the use of progestogen (10 trials, 1028 women; Peto OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.50).In a subgroup analysis of four trials involving women who had recurrent miscarriages (three or more consecutive miscarriages; four trials, 225 women), progestogen treatment showed a statistically significant decrease in miscarriage rate compared to placebo or no treatment (Peto OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.72). However, these four trials were of poorer methodological quality. No statistically significant differences were found between the route of administration of progestogen (oral, intramuscular, vaginal) versus placebo or no treatment. No significant differences in the rates of preterm birth, neonatal death, or fetal genital anomalies/virilization were found between progestogen therapy versus placebo/control. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere is no evidence to support the routine use of progestogen to prevent miscarriage in early to mid-pregnancy. However, there seems to be evidence of benefit in women with a history of recurrent miscarriage. Treatment for these women may be warranted given the reduced rates of miscarriage in the treatment group and the finding of no statistically significant difference between treatment and control groups in rates of adverse effects suffered by either mother or baby in the available evidence. Larger trials are currently underway to inform treatment for this group of women.
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.