SynthesisJBRA assisted reproduction2017
Do women offered assisted reproduction technologies have a higher incidence of gynecologic cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in JBRA assisted reproduction, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assisted Reproductive Technology and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Development of endometrial stromal sarcoma in a patient undergoing in vitro fertilization: A case report.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2020Article
- Risks of ovarian, breast, and corpus uteri cancer in women treated with assisted reproductive technology in Great Britain, 1991-2010: data linkage study including 2.2 million person years of observation.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The last two decades have seen an increase in the number of women diagnosed with infertility. The consequent growth in the use of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) calls for the determination of its long-term effects, including the risk of cancer. Many studies have attempted to answer this question, albeit with contradictory results. This review aimed to assess whether assisted reproductive technologies are associated with an increased risk of gynecological cancer. A search for papers in the literature was carried out on MEDLINE, TRIP DATABASE and NICE, resulting in 11 studies enrolling 3,900,231 patients altogether. Of these, 118,320 were offered ART. The incidence of gynecological cancer in the group offered ART was 0.6%, while the incidence in the group not offered ART was 2.1%. Taking all the studies into consideration, women offered ART were not at greater risk of having gynecological cancer; instead, a protective association was found.
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.