Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2015
Prevention of multiple pregnancies in couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility: randomised controlled trial of in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer or in vitro fertilisation in modified natural cycle compared with intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation.
Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 9 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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Controlled ovarian stimulation protocols for assisted reproduction: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- IVF versus IUI with ovarian stimulation for unexplained infertility: a collaborative individual participant data meta-analysis.Human reproduction update · 2024Pooled it
- In vitro fertilisation for unexplained subfertility.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Intrauterine insemination + controlled ovarian hyperstimulation versus in vitro fertilisation in unexplained infertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Pooled it
- Agents for ovarian stimulation for intrauterine insemination (IUI) in ovulatory women with infertility.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Assisted reproductive technologies for male subfertility.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- In vitro fertilisation for unexplained subfertility.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Expectant management versus IUI in unexplained subfertility and a poor pregnancy prognosis (EXIUI study): a randomized controlled trial.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2022Trial
- Trial
- A Bayesian reevaluation of randomized controlled trials in assisted reproductive technology: quantifying evidence strength for null and alternative hypotheses.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Should couples with a low total progressively motile sperm count in the first intrauterine insemination cycle continue this treatment?Asian journal of andrology · 2025Article
- Higher Pregnancy Success Rates in Patients with Diminished Ovarian Reserve < 40 Years When Initially Treated by Intrauterine Insemination with Mild Ovarian Stimulation Compared to In Vitro Fertilization Alone: A Pilot Study.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessment of clinical pregnancies in up to eight ovarian stimulation with intrauterine insemination treatment cycles in those unable to proceed with in vitro fertilization.Fertility and sterility · 2024Article
- Multifetal Pregnancy After Implementation of a Publicly Funded Fertility Program.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- The impact of clomiphene citrate on the endometrium in comparison to gonadotropins in intrauterine insemination cycles: is it thinner and does it matter?Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Prognosis-based management of unexplained infertility-why not?Human reproduction open · 2024Article
- Should IUI replace IVF as first-line treatment for unexplained infertility? A literature review.BMC women's health · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the effectiveness of in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer or in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle with that of intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in terms of a healthy child.
designMulticentre, open label, three arm, parallel group, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.
setting17 centres in the Netherlands.
participantsCouples seeking fertility treatment after at least 12 months of unprotected intercourse, with the female partner aged between 18 and 38 years, an unfavourable prognosis for natural conception, and a diagnosis of unexplained or mild male subfertility.
interventionsThree cycles of in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer (plus subsequent cryocycles), six cycles of in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle, or six cycles of intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation within 12 months after randomisation.
main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was birth of a healthy child resulting from a singleton pregnancy conceived within 12 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were live birth, clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, time to pregnancy, complications of pregnancy, and neonatal morbidity and mortality
results602 couples were randomly assigned between January 2009 and February 2012; 201 were allocated to in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer, 194 to in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle, and 207 to intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Birth of a healthy child occurred in 104 (52%) couples in the in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer group, 83 (43%) in the in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle group, and 97 (47%) in the intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation group. This corresponds to a risk, relative to intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation, of 1.10 (95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.34) for in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer and 0.91 (0.73 to 1.14) for in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle. These 95% confidence intervals do not extend below the predefined threshold of 0.69 for inferiority. Multiple pregnancy rates per ongoing pregnancy were 6% (7/121) after in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer, 5% (5/102) after in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle, and 7% (8/119) after intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation (one sided P=0.52 for in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer compared with intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation; one sided P=0.33 for in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle compared with intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation).
conclusionsIn vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer and in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle were non-inferior to intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in terms of the birth of a healthy child and showed comparable, low multiple pregnancy rates.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN52843371; Nederlands Trial Register NTR939.
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.