ArticleInternational journal of fertility & sterility2018
Modeling In Vitro Fertilization Data Considering Multiple Outcomes Observed among Iranian Infertile Women.
Article in International journal of fertility & sterility, 2018. 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.
- Treatment experience of patients with failedFrontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Joint Modeling ofInternational journal of fertility & sterility · 2023Article
- In vitro fertilization and embryo transfer alter human placental function through trophoblasts in early pregnancy.Molecular medicine reports · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWomen undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles should successfully go through multiple points during the procedure (i.e., implantation, clinical pregnancy, no spontaneous abortion and delivery) to achieve live births. In this study, data from multiple cycles and multiple points during the IVF cycle are collected for each individual to model the effects of factors associated with success at different stages of IVF cycles in Iranian infertile women. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis historical cohort study includes 996 assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles of 511 infertile women. Covariates considered in this study were women's age, type of cycle (fresh or frozen embryo transfer), number of embryos transferred and having polycystic ovarian syndrome during IVF cycles. Generalized estimating equations were used for calculation of odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of success at different stages during IVF cycles. Cluster-weighted generalized estimating equations (CWGEE) was also fitted to handle informative cluster size.
resultsAfter adjusting for potential confounders, it was seen that receiving frozen embryo transfer was associated with higher odds of success compared to receiving fresh embryo transfer (adj OR: 2.26, 95% CI: 1.66-3.07); however, cycles with fresh embryo transfer exhibited better results in clinical pregnancy compared to those receiving frozen embryo. Being in the age category of 38 to 40 was associated with lower odds of success compared to the reference category (p<35) in CWGEE model (adj OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.45-1.00). The number of embryos transferred was positively associated with the odds of success in CWGEE (adj OR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.03-1.42) as well as the GEE model.
conclusionReceiving frozen embryo was positively associated with odds of success compared to cycles with fresh embryo. The number of embryos transferred and women's age were significantly associated with odds of success.
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.