ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2016
Reply: First do no harm: continuing the uterine NK cell debate.
Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Intralipid therapy and adverse reproductive outcome: is there any evidence?Reproduction & fertility · 2021Pooled it
- Correlation of peripheral blood and endometrial immunophenotyping in ART: is peripheral blood sampling useful?Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- Potential utility of a non-invasive menstrual blood immunophenotype analysis in reproductive medicine.Reproduction & fertility · 2022Article
- Endometrial lymphocyte concentrations in adverse reproductive outcome populations.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2019Article
- Detailed endometrial immune assessment of both normal and adverse reproductive outcome populations.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2019Article
- Anti-oxidant mediated normalisation of raised intracellular cytokines in patients with reproductive failure.Fertility research and practice · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
- Comment on
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26637830What 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.