Observational studyBMC pregnancy and childbirth2021
Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England, an observational study.
Observational study in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Potential increase of the U.S. total fertility rate resulting from restorative treatment of unresolved subfertility: a simulation study.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- Impact of intimate partner violence onFrontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Fertility awareness methods and waiting conduct in idiopathic infertility: a prospective observational study.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- Natural procreative technology (NaProTechnology) for infertility: take-home baby rate and clinical outcomes in a 5-year single-center cohort of 1,310 couples.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Article
- Fertility Awareness-Based Methods for Family Planning and Women's Health: Impact of an Online Elective.Family medicine · 2024Article
- Examining the co-occurrence of endometriosis and polycystic ovarian syndrome.AJOG global reports · 2023Article
- Successful pregnancy with restorative reproductive medicine after 16 years of infertility, three recurrent miscarriages, and eight unsuccessful embryo transfers with in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2022Article
- Fertility Awareness-Based Methods for Women's Health and Family Planning.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
- International Natural Procreative Technology Evaluation and Surveillance of Treatment for Subfertility (iNEST): enrollment and methods.Human reproduction open · 2022Article
- Revitalizing reproductive health: innovations and future frontiers in restorative medicine.Therapeutic advances in reproductive healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRestorative reproductive medicine (RRM) seeks to identify and correct underlying causes and factors contributing to infertility and reproductive dysfunction. Many components of RRM are highly suitable for primary care practice. We studied the outcomes amongst couples who received restorative reproductive medicine treatment for infertility in a primary care setting.
methodsTwo family physicians in Massachusetts trained in a systematic approach to RRM (natural procreative technology, or NaProTechnology) treated couples with infertility. We retrospectively reviewed the characteristics, diagnoses, treatments, and outcomes for all couples treated during the years 1989 to 2014. We compared pregnancy and live birth by clinical characteristics using Kaplan-Meier analysis. We employed the Fleming-Harrington weighted Renyi test or the logrank test to compare the cumulative proportion with pregnancy or with live birth.
resultsAmong 370 couples beginning treatment for infertility, the mean age was 34.8 years, the mean prior time trying to conceive was 2.7 years, and 27% had a prior live birth. The mean number of diagnoses per couple was 4.9. Treatment components included fertility tracking with the Creighton Model FertilityCare System (80%); medications to enhance cervical mucus production (81%), to stimulate ovulation (62%), or to support the luteal phase (75%); and referral to female laparoscopy by a surgeon specializing in endometriosis (46%). The cumulative live birth rate at 2 years was 29% overall; this was significantly higher for women under age 35 (34%), and for women with body mass index < 25 (40%). There were 2 sets of twins and no higher-order multiple gestations. Of the 63 births with data available, 58 (92%) occurred at term.
conclusionsFamily physicians can provide a RRM approach for infertility to identify underlying causes and promote healthy term live births. Younger women and women with body mass index < 25 are more likely to have a live birth.
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.