SynthesisHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2020
Standardizing definitions and reporting guidelines for the infertility core outcome set: an international consensus development study† ‡.
Synthesis in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- Synchronised approach for intrauterine insemination in subfertile couples.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The presence, clarity, and consistency of definitions in pregnancy outcomes in infertility trials: a systematic review.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Oocyte activation for women following intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Preconception lifestyle advice for people with infertility.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Trial
- Can hysterosalpingo-foam sonography replace hysterosalpingography as first-choice tubal patency test? A randomized non-inferiority trial.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2022Trial
- Association between endometrial thickness and cumulative live birth rate in one oocyte-retrieval cycle: a retrospective cohort study including 26,127 patients.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- A Core Outcome Set to Guide Future Research on Caesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy: COSCAR Consensus Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Article
- Impact of varicocelectomy prior ICSI on clinical and neonatal outcomes: A multilevel analysis.Arab journal of urology · 2026Article
- Epigenetic links between paternal age, reproduction, and offspring health: a focus on sncRNAs.Reproduction & fertility · 2025Review
- Association between heavy metal exposure and pregnancy loss: evidence from NHANES 2011-2016.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2025Article
- A core outcome set for future male infertility research: development of an international consensus.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Article
- The impact of HBV, HCV, or syphilis infections on embryo and pregnancy outcomes in couples undergoing IVF treatment: a matched cohort study.Human reproduction open · 2025Article
- Assessing the uptake of infertility core outcome set in IVF randomized controlled trials.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Changes in adverse obstetrical and neonatal outcomes over time in American women with polycystic ovary syndrome: an 11-year study of a population database.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Article
- Changes in adverse obstetrical and neonatal outcomes over time in American women with polycystic ovary syndrome: an 11-year study of a population database.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Article
- The (cost-) effectiveness Of Surgical excision of Colorectal endometriosis compared to ART treatment trAjectory (TOSCA study) - a study protocol.Reproduction & fertility · 2024Article
- Male infertility: what on earth is going on? Pilot international questionnaire study regarding clinical evaluation and fertility treatment for men.Reproduction & fertility · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
97 authors at 20 institutions in 12 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
study questionCan consensus definitions for the core outcome set for infertility be identified in order to recommend a standardized approach to reporting? SUMMARY ANSWER: Consensus definitions for individual core outcomes, contextual statements and a standardized reporting table have been developed. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Different definitions exist for individual core outcomes for infertility. This variation increases the opportunities for researchers to engage with selective outcome reporting, which undermines secondary research and compromises clinical practice guideline development. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential definitions were identified by a systematic review of definition development initiatives and clinical practice guidelines and by reviewing Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. These definitions were discussed in a face-to-face consensus development meeting, which agreed consensus definitions. A standardized approach to reporting was also developed as part of the process. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,
methodsHealthcare professionals, researchers and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus development methods. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Forty-four potential definitions were inventoried across four definition development initiatives, including the Harbin Consensus Conference Workshop Group and International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, 12 clinical practice guidelines and Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. Twenty-seven participants, from 11 countries, contributed to the consensus development meeting. Consensus definitions were successfully developed for all core outcomes. Specific recommendations were made to improve reporting. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations. There was limited representation from low- and middle-income countries. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
findingsA minimum data set should assist researchers in populating protocols, case report forms and other data collection tools. The generic reporting table should provide clear guidance to researchers and improve the reporting of their results within journal publications and conference presentations. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials statement, and over 80 specialty journals have committed to implementing this core outcome set. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. J.L.H.E. reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. R.S.L. reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. B.W.M. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. C.N. reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and a financial interest in NexHand. E.H.Y.N. reports research sponsorship from Merck. A.S. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. J.W. reports being a statistical editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. A.V. reports that he is a Statistical Editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology & Fertility Review Group and of the journal Reproduction. His employing institution has received payment from Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority for his advice on review of research evidence to inform their 'traffic light' system for infertility treatment 'add-ons'. N.L.V. reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative: 1023.
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.