Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30655717›Full record

ArticleReproductive medicine and biology2019

Assisted reproductive technology in Japan: A summary report for 2016 by the Ethics Committee of the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Osamu Ishihara, Seung Chik Jwa, Akira Kuwahara, Tomonori Ishikawa, Koji Kugu, Rintaro Sawa, Kouji Banno, Minoru Irahara, Hidekazu Saito

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive medicine and biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  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. Article
  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

9 authors.

Osamu IshiharaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Saitama Medical University Saitama Japan.
Seung Chik JwaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Saitama Medical University Saitama Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8815-5714
Akira KuwaharaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences Tokushima University Tokushima Japan.
Tomonori IshikawaDepartment of Comprehensive Reproductive Medicine, Graduate School Tokyo Medical and Dental University Tokyo Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1012-1557
Koji KuguDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Tokyo Metropolitan Bokutoh Hospital Tokyo Japan.
Rintaro SawaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nippon Medical School Tokyo Japan.
Kouji BannoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine Keio University Tokyo Japan.
Minoru IraharaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences Tokushima University Tokushima Japan.
Hidekazu SaitoDivision of Reproductive Medicine, Center of Maternal-Fetal, Neonatal and Reproductive Medicine National Center for Child Health and Development Tokyo Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology started an online cycle-based assisted reproductive technology (ART) registry system in 2007. This report presents the characteristics and treatment outcomes of ART registered for the cycles practiced during 2016.

methodsCycle-specific information for all ART cycles implemented in participating ART facilities were collected. A descriptive analysis was conducted for the registry database of 2016.

resultsIn total, 447 790 treatment cycles and 54 110 neonates (one in 18.1 neonates born in Japan) were reported in 2016. The mean patients' age was 38.1 years (SD = 4.5). Among the egg retrieval cycles, 104 575 of 251 399 (41.6%) were freeze-all cycles without fresh embryo transfers (ET), while fresh ET was performed in 64 497 cycles (58.4%). A total of 187 132 frozen-thawed ET cycles were reported, resulting in 62 432 pregnancies and 44 484 neonates born. Single ET was selected for 81.0% of fresh transfers and 82.7% of frozen cycles, resulting in singleton pregnancy/live birth rates of 97.0%/96.4% and 96.7%/96.4%, respectively.

conclusionThe total ART cycles and subsequent live births continued to increase in 2016. Single ET was performed more than 80%, and ET has shifted from using fresh embryos to frozen ones.

Indexed as

ART registryfreeze‐allin vitro fertilizationJapan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecologysingle embryo transfer

Identifiers

PMID30655717
PMCPMC6332769

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.