ArticleInternational journal of women's health2022
Characteristics and Outcomes of Herbal Medicine for Female Infertility: A Retrospective Analysis of Data from a Korean Medicine Clinic During 2010-2020.
Article in International journal of women's health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Herbal medicine as a complementary therapy for dysmenorrhea: effects on pain and reduction of analgesic use.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Integrating Acupuncture and Herbal Medicine into Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of East Asian Traditional Medicine.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A Survey of Utilization and Satisfaction of Korean Subfertility Treatment among Korean Women.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Utilization of traditional herbal medicine formulas for unexplained female infertility in Korea: a retrospective study.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Few studies have assessed outcomes associated with the use of traditional medicine therapies to manage infertility in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics of and infertility treatment effects among patients who visited a Korean medicine (KM) clinic to aid in achieving pregnancy. This study consisted of a 10-year analysis of patient records from a KM clinic. Methods: A retrospective 10-year (2010-2020) chart analysis was performed using the medical records of infertile patients who visited a KM clinic in South Korea for fertility treatment (ICD-10, infertility symptoms: 59 codes). Results: Of the 6194 patients who visited the clinic during the selected time frame, 1786 were female patients seeking fertility treatment to achieve pregnancy. Among the 1786 infertile women, 586 women succeeded in becoming pregnant (32.8%). Among the 586 patients who became pregnant, 476 women had received KM, 92 had been treated using KM and in vitro fertilization (IVF), and 18 had received KM and undergone intrauterine insemination (IUI). The live birth rates achieved with these treatments were 66.0%, 68.8%, and 66.7%, respectively. The most frequently prescribed medicines were Gamiboher-tang (Jiaweiwuxu-tang), Gamiguibi-tang (Jiaweiguipi-tang), and Gamidanggui-san (Jiaweidanggui-san). Additionally, the most frequent adjunct therapies administered to these patients were acupuncture and moxibustion. Conclusion: Infertility therapies using KM may be a successful option to treat infertility when used alone or in addition to IVF and IUI. However, further pharmacological investigations and clinical trials are required to ensure the objectivity of the efficacy evaluation.
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.