ReviewFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2015
Add-ons in IVF programme - Hype or Hope?
Review in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endometrial microbiota-targeted therapies for chronic endometritis-associated recurrent implantation failure and their impact on IVF outcomes: A systematic review and methodological quality assessment.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Pooled it
- Endometrial scratch to increase live birth rates in women undergoing first-time in vitro fertilisation: RCT and systematic review.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2022Pooled it
- Low Molecular Weight Heparin-Aspirin-Prednisolone Combination Does Not Increase the Live Birth Rate in Recurrent Implantation Failure: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2023Article
- Revisiting selected ethical aspects of current clinical in vitro fertilization (IVF) practice.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022Review
- Fertility interventions 'add-ons' in clinical ART practice: Ethical, Moral and Commercial Considerations.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
- Article
- The Evolving Concept of Poor-Prognosis for Women Undertaking IVF and the Notion of Growth Hormone as an Adjuvant; A Single-Center Viewpoint.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2019Review
- The Effect of Growth Hormone on the Clinical Outcomes of Poor Ovarian Reserve Patients UndergoingFrontiers in endocrinology · 2019Article
- New Generation IVF - What does it mean?Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A series of new technologies and adjuvant therapies have been advocated in order to improve the success of IVF treatment. Dehydro-epiandrostenedione, growth hormones, Coenzyme Q 10, calcium ionosphores, immune therapy, heparin, low-dose aspirin, and vasodilators are among commonly prescribed pharmacological adjuvants. New technologies that are proposed to improve IVF outcomes include advanced sperm selection procedures, time- lapse embryo monitoring, preimplantation genetic screening, assisted hatching endometrial injury or embryo-glue. This review looked into current evidence to justify the use of these co-interventions and whether some of them can still be offered while awaiting more robust evidence to con rm or refute their role.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27729969PMC5058413W2431003899What 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.