ArticleReproductive biomedicine online2021
Validation of the French IVF guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Reproductive biomedicine online, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
research questionIs a symptom questionnaire as per the French IVF guidelines adequate for screening patients during the COVID-19 pandemic?
designPatients planning IVF from June 2020 to February 2021 were included in the study. In compliance with French IVF guidelines, all patients fever-free on the day of oocyte retrieval were screened for risk of COVID-19 by completing a symptom questionnaire after being counselled regarding the importance of a COVID-19-free medical practice. Patients with IVF planned between June and September 2020 only completed the questionnaire (group 1), while those planning IVF after September 2020 also underwent the RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 RNA (group 2). Cycle cancellation rates between groups were compared. Group 1 patients consented for follicular fluid testing for SARS-CoV-2 and an interview after cycle completion to determine COVID-19 exposure during the 6 months before and after retrieval.
resultsCycle cancellation rates for groups 1 and 2 were 0% (0/214) versus 1.4% (8/577), respectively, (P = 0.116). All 183 follicular fluid samples from group 1 were negative for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Of 171 patients interviewed post-IVF, 16 (93.4%) developed COVID-19 symptoms or a positive real-time PCR (RT-PCR) RT-PCR test, but none within 2 months pre- or post-retrieval.
conclusionsThese results provide reassurance that, consistent with the COVID-19 French IVF guidelines, use of a symptom questionnaire is effective in screening patients planning to undergo IVF. Failure to detect viral RNA in any follicular fluid sample does not negate the possibility that follicular fluid is a viral reservoir. However, the findings provide reassurance that the follicular environment in this study's carefully screened population was COVID-free.
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.