Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31646262›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of reproductive biomedicine2019

Progesterone-primed ovarian stimulation in polycystic ovarian syndrome: An RCT.

Maryam Eftekhar, Masrooreh Hoseini, Lida Saeed

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of reproductive biomedicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 22 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 8 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Progestogen-primed ovarian stimulation vs GnRH antagonists and/or agonists for women undergoing assisted reproduction: systematic review and meta-analysis.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Maryam EftekharResearch and Clinical Center for Infertility, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences Yazd Iran.
Masrooreh HoseiniResearch and Clinical Center for Infertility, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences Yazd Iran.
Lida SaeedResearch and Clinical Center for Infertility, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences Yazd Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn vitro fertilization is an important therapy for women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS). The use of new ways of improving clinical results is yet required.

objectiveThis study was aimed to investigate the efficacy of progesterone primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) and compare with conventional antagonist protocol in PCOS. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 120 PCOS women who were candidates for assisted reproductive technology treatment from August to January 2019 were enrolled in this RCT and were placed into two groups, randomly (n= 60/each). The PPOS group received 20 mg /day Dydrogesterone orally since the second day of the cycle and the control group received antagonist protocol. The pregnancy outcomes including the chemical and clinical pregnancy, the miscarriage rate, and the percent of gestational sacs/ transferred embryos was compared in two groups.

resultsNumber of MII oocyte, maturity rate, Number of 2 pronuclei (2PN) and serum estradiol levels on trigger day were statistically lower in PPOS group (p = 0.019, p = 0.035, p = 0.032, p = 0.030), respectively. Serum LH level on trigger day in PPOS group was higher than antagonist group (p = 0.005). Although there wasn't sever ovarian hyper simulation syndrome in any participants, mild and moderate ovarian hyper simulation syndrome was less in PPOS group (p = 0.001). Also, the chemical and clinical pregnancy rate were higher in the antagonist group, althoughit was not statistically significant (p = 0.136, p = 0.093 respectively).

conclusionOur study demonstrate that PPOS does not improve chemical and clinical pregnancy rate of the infertile women with PCOS.

Indexed as

Controlled ovarian stimulationFrozen-thawed embryo transferPolycystic ovarian syndromePregnancy rateProgesterone

Identifiers

PMID31646262
PMCPMC6804324

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.