ArticleBMJ open2020
Comparison of a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol with a flexible GnRH antagonist protocol in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome who are participating in an IVF programme: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06637189 (Protocol with Progestin-primed Ovarian Stimulation), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Protocol with Progestin-primed Ovarian Stimulation (PPOS) from the Beginning of Stimulation Versus Protocol with GnRH Antagonists for Ovarian Stimulation in Patients Undergoing DUOSTIM with Embryo Accumulation for PGT-A.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparison of the effects of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol and gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Pooled it
- Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Review
- Progestogens for prevention of luteinising hormone (LH) surge in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation as part of an assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycle.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Review
- Comparison of the neonatal outcomes of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation and flexible GnRH antagonist protocols: a propensity score-matched cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Live Birth Outcomes for PCOS Patients Under the Follicular-Phase Long-Acting GnRH Agonist Protocol or Antagonist Protocol - A Retrospective Chinese Cohort.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023Article
- Does the cell number of 0PN embryos on day 3 affect pregnancy and neonatal outcomes following single blastocyst transfer?BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Comparison of the Cumulative Live Birth Rates of Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation and Flexible GnRH Antagonist Protocols in Patients With Low Prognosis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWomen with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) protocols are typically characterised by an increased number of oocytes retrieved. The oocytes are often of poor quality, leading to lower pregnancy rates, higher miscarriage rates and an increased risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Since our previous preliminary study showed that a novel progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol blocked the luteinising hormone (LH) surge during IVF and achieved a higher pregnancy rate with a lower incidence of OHSS, we designed a prospective randomised controlled trial to compare the efficacy and safety of this PPOS protocol with the flexible gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in patients with PCOS who are undergoing IVF procedures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patients with PCOS will be randomised to one of two controlled ovarian stimulation regimens-GnRH antagonist or PPOS-using a computer-generated random number. A freeze-all strategy using embryo vitrification techniques and frozen embryo transfer will be performed in both groups. The primary outcome is the live-birth rate per transfer. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of premature LH surges, the duration and total dose of human menopausal gonadotropin stimulation, the number of oocytes retrieved, the incidence of moderate or severe OHSS, the number of embryos available for transfer, implantation rates, clinical pregnancy rates, pregnancy loss rates, ectopic pregnancy rates, pregnancy and neonatal complications, and congenital anomalies. The necessary sample size for this trial was estimated as 392 participants, with 196 participants in each group. Intention-to-treat analysis was used in processing our experimental data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the hospital (2016-133-T82). The trial will be conducted according to the principles of the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki and in accordance with Good Clinical Practice standards. The findings of this trial will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTRIPR16009580.
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.