Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30083131›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2018

The Effect of Dose Adjustments in a Subsequent Cycle of Women With Suboptimal Response Following Conventional Ovarian Stimulation.

Panagiotis Drakopoulos, Samuel Santos-Ribeiro, Ernesto Bosch, Juan Garcia-Velasco, Christophe Blockeel, Alessia Romito, Herman Tournaye, Nikolaos P Polyzos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Ten years of POSEIDON classification: a SOAR analysis.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Panagiotis DrakopoulosDepartment of Surgical and Clinical Science, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Samuel Santos-RibeiroDepartment of Surgical and Clinical Science, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Ernesto BoschInstituto Valenciano de Infertilidad (IVI-RMA), Valencia, Spain.
Juan Garcia-VelascoInstituto Valenciano de Infertilidad (IVI-RMA), Madrid, Spain.
Christophe BlockeelDepartment of Surgical and Clinical Science, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Alessia RomitoCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Herman TournayeDepartment of Surgical and Clinical Science, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Nikolaos P PolyzosDepartment of Surgical and Clinical Science, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several infertile patients, who may even represent around 40% of the infertile cohort, may respond "suboptimally" (4-9 oocytes retrieved) following IVF, despite being predicted as normal responders. The aim of our longitudinal study was to evaluate the ovarian response of suboptimal responders in terms of the number of oocytes retrieved, following their second IVF cycle, evaluating exclusively patients who had the same stimulation protocol and used the same or higher initial dose of the same type of gonadotropin compared to their previous failed IVF attempt. Overall, our analysis included 160 patients treated with a fixed antagonist protocol in their second cycle with the same [53 (33.1%)] or higher [107 (66.9%)] starting dose of rFSH. The number of oocytes retrieved was significantly higher in the second IVF cycle [6 (5-8) vs. 9 (6-12),

Indexed as

dose adjustmentsnumber of oocytesoocytesovarian responsesuboptimal responders

Identifiers

PMID30083131
PMCPMC6064928

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.