Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33078329›Full record

SynthesisReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2021

Effects of Growth Hormone Supplementation on Poor Ovarian Responders in Assisted Reproductive Technology: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Fen-Ting Liu, Kai-Lun Hu, Rong Li

Erratum issuedAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 2021. 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 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. The effects of growth hormone on the outcomes ofFrontiers in endocrinology · 2024
    Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Fen-Ting Liu *Beijing Key Laboratory of Reproductive Endocrinology and Assisted Reproductive Technology and Key Laboratory of Assisted Reproduction (Peking University), Ministry of Education, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100191, China.
Kai-Lun Hu *Women's Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310006, China.
Rong LiBeijing Key Laboratory of Reproductive Endocrinology and Assisted Reproductive Technology and Key Laboratory of Assisted Reproduction (Peking University), Ministry of Education, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100191, China. roseli001@sina.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0305-5579
Peking University · CNWomen's Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To investigate whether additional growth hormone (GH) treatment can improve pregnancy outcomes in poor ovarian responders (POR), this systematic review and meta-analysis is prospectively designed and has been registered in PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD42019137866). Literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from January 2010 to June 2019, and studies before 2010 were included based on a Cochrane review published in 2010. Only English articles and randomized clinical trial studies were included. A total of 12 studies were included for analysis. GH treatment in poor ovarian responders significantly increased the clinical pregnancy rate (odds ratio (OR) = 1.75 (1.23, 2.50)), and the live birth rate also tended to increase after GH treatment (OR = 1.51 (0.97, 2.35)). Other outcomes including the gonadotropin requirement, oocyte retrieval number, endometrium thickness, and the number of patients with available embryos for transfer were also improved by growth hormone treatment (weighted mean differences (WMD) = - 0.78 (- 1.23, - 0.33), 1.41 (0.72, 2.09), 0.36 (0.18, 0.53), OR = 2.67 (1.47, 4.68), respectively). Based on the current study, GH treatment in POR can increase clinical pregnancy rate and show a higher but not statistically significant likelihood of live birth rate. The effect is likely to be mediated by improving ovarian response and endometrium thickness. The effect of GH treatment on live birth rate should be tested by further studies with a larger sample size.

Indexed as

Reproductive Techniques, AssistedFemaleGrowth HormoneHumansInfertility, FemaleOvulation InductionPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePregnancy RateGrowth HormoneAssisted reproductive technologyGrowth hormoneLive birth rateMeta-analysisPoor ovarian respondersSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33078329
OpenAlexW3092675978

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.