ArticleEuropean journal of translational myology2022
Comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols among women with poor response: A randomized clinical trial.
Article in European journal of translational myology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Controlled ovarian stimulation protocols for assisted reproduction: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of the effects of the Stop GnRH agonist with the letrozole protocol in poor ovarian responders: ABOTH randomized controlled trial.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2025Trial
- Recommendations for the management of GnRH-ant for ovarian stimulation in the assistant reproductive process: Benefits and harms for different ovarian response population.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2025Article
- The Effectiveness of the GnRH Agonist/Antagonist Protocols for Different Poseidon Subgroups of Poor Ovarian Responders.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This is a randomized controlled trial conducted in a tertiary referral fertility department. Participants were women with previous poor ovarian response undergoing in vitro fertilization. (IVF). One hundred and ninety-two women were randomized to the short GnRH agonist and antagonist regimens. The primary outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary outcome measures were the number of embryos transferred, chemical and clinical pregnancy rate and live birth. The number of oocytes retrieved was higher with the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist regimen compared to the short agonist regimen (3.10 2.70 vs. 2.992.60), but there was no significant difference. The duration of stimulation and total gonadotropin dose were higher with short agonist regimens compared to antagonist regimens, with the latter being statistically significant (p < 0.001). The chemical pregnancy rate was 8.33 percent with the short agonist regimen and 7.29 percent with the antagonist regimen, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.79). In terms of lower cycles cancelation and higher chemical pregnancy, short GnRH agonist regim is appropriate choice for poor responders.
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.