Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24520489›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of fertility & sterility2013

Comparison of Congenital Abnormalities of Infants Conceived by Assisted Reproductive Techniques versus Infants with Natural Conception in Tehran.

Mansoureh Farhangniya, Eshagh Dortaj Rabori, Ramin Mozafari Kermani, Ali Akbar Haghdoost, Abbas Bahrampour, Pezhman Bagheri, Paul A L Lancaster, Mahnaz Ashrafi, Ahmad Vosough Taqi Dizaj, Hamid Gourabi and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of fertility & sterility, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Mansoureh FarhangniyaDepartment of Genetics at Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, ACECR, Tehran, Iran ; Department of Epidemiology and Statistic, Kerman University of Medical Science, Kerman, Iran.
Eshagh Dortaj RaboriDepartment of Epidemiology and Statistic, Kerman University of Medical Science, Kerman, Iran.
Ramin Mozafari KermaniDepartment of Child Health Research ACECR-Tehran Medical Science Branch, Tehran, Iran.
Ali Akbar HaghdoostModeling Research Center, Kerman University of Medical Science, Kerman, Iran.
Abbas BahrampourDepartment of Epidemiology and Statistic, Kerman University of Medical Science, Kerman, Iran.
Pezhman BagheriSocial Development and Health Promotion Research Center, Gonabad University of Medical Sciences, Gonabad, Iran.
Paul A L LancasterMenzies Centre for Health Policy, School of Public Health, University of Sydney,Sydney, NSW Australia.
Mahnaz AshrafiDepartment of Endocrinology and Female Infertility, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, ACECR, Tehran, Iran.
Ahmad Vosough Taqi DizajDepartment of Reproductive Imaging at Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, ACECR, Tehran, Iran.
Hamid GourabiDepartment of Genetics at Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, ACECR, Tehran, Iran.
Abolhassan Shahzadeh FazeliDepartment of Genetics at Reproductive Biomedicine Research Center, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, ACECR, Tehran, Iran.
Academic Center for Education, Culture and Research · IRKerman University of Medical Sciences · IRGonabad University of Medical Sciences · IRRoyan Institute · IRTehran University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn many countries, 1 to 3% of newborn infants are conceived by assisted reproductive techniques (ART). Despite the success of ART, there is concern about the risk of congenital malformations among these infants. We report our experience to determine whether use of ART is associated with an increase in major congenital malformations or adverse pregnancy outcomes. MATERIALS AND

methodsHistorical cohort study of major congenital malformations (MCM) was performed in 978 births from January 2008 to December 2010. The data for this analysis were derived from a Tehran's ART linked data file by simple sampling method. In our study, the risk of congenital malformations was compared in 326 ART infants and 652 naturally conceived (NC) infants. We also performed multiple logistic regression analyses to calculate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the independent association of ART on each outcome.

resultsWe found 56 infants with major congenital malformations, these included 29 NC infants (4.4%) and 27 ART infants (8.3%). In comparison with NC infants, ART infants had a significant 1.94-fold increased risk of MCM.After adjustment for maternal age, infant's sex stillbirth, abortion and type of delivery, we found a relatively small difference in risk (OR=2.04). In this study the majority (94.3%) of all infants were normal but 5.7% of infants had at least one MCM. The prevalence rate for the intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was 6.5% for the In vitro fertilisation (IVF) group was 15.9% or 2.73-fold higher than ICSI group (P=0.018). Also we ignore the possible role of genotype and other unknown factors in causing more malformations in ART infants.

conclusionOther studies have shown a slightly increased risk of major congenital malformations in pregnancies resulting from ART. Likewise, this study reports a greater risk of MCMs in ART infants than in naturally conceived infants. We also found evidence of a difference in risk of MCMs between IVF and ICSI. Musculoskeletal and urogenital malformations were the most reported MCMs in ART infants according to organs and systems classification.

Indexed as

AnomalyAssisted Reproductive TechniqueConceptionCongenital MalformationsFertilizationInfants

Identifiers

PMID24520489
PMCPMC3914490
OpenAlexW1498627317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.