SynthesisFrontiers in public health2022
Transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation for pregnancy outcomes in women undergoing
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Effects of acupuncture-related therapies on pregnancy outcomes among women undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Pooled it
- Dexmedetomidine-dezocine versus propofol-remifentanil anesthesia for ultrasound-guided transvaginal oocyte retrieval: a randomized controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Trial
- Effects of acupuncture and moxibustion therapy on endometrial receptivity of infertile women withFrontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Effects of Transcutaneous Electrical Acustimulation on Patients with Fibromyalgia Syndrome: Study Protocol of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Trial.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- Article
- Effects and mechanisms of acupuncture on women related health.Frontiers of medicine · 2024Review
- Impact of Transcutaneous Electrical Acupoint Stimulation on BDNF Expression and IVF Outcomes in Patients with Infertility.International journal of general medicine · 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
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Infertility is a common health problem affecting couples of childbearing age. The proposal of Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether TEAS is effective and safe to improve the pregnancy outcomes for women undergoing IVF-ET. Methods: Eight online databases were searched from inception to 19 November 2021. In addition, four clinical trial registries were also searched, relevant references were screened, and experts were consulted for possible eligible studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included patients with infertility who underwent IVF and used TEAS as the main adjuvant treatment vs. non-TEAS or mock intervention controls were included. The clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) was considered the primary outcome. High-quality embryo rate (HQER), live birth rate (LBR), biochemical pregnancy rate (BPR), ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR), early miscarriage rate (EMR), birth defects rate (BDR), and adverse events related to interventions were regarded as secondary outcomes. The selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and data synthesis were conducted by two independent researchers using Endnote software V.9.1 and Stata 16.0 software. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to evaluate the evidence quality of each outcome. Results: There were 19 RCTs involving 5,330 participants included. The results of meta-analyses showed that TEAS can improve CPR [RR = 1.42, 95% CI (1.31, 1.54)], HQER [RR = 1.09, 95% CI (1.05, 1.14)], and BPR [RR = 1.45, 95% CI (1.22, 1.71)] of women underwent IVF-ET with low quality of evidence, and improve LBR [RR = 1.42, 95% CI (1.19, 1.69)] with moderate quality of evidence. There was no significant difference in EMR [RR = 1.08, 95% CI (0.80, 1.45)] and BDR [RR = 0.93, 95% CI (0.13, 6.54)] with very low and moderate quality of evidence, respectively. A cumulative meta-analysis showed that the effective value of TEAS vs. controls was relatively stable in 2018 [RR = 1.52, 95% CI (1.35, 1.71)]. In addition, no serious adverse events associated with TEAS were reported. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that TEAS may be an effective and safe adjuvant treatment for women undergoing IVF-ET to improve pregnancy outcomes. However, the current evidence quality is considered to be limited, and more high-quality RCTs are needed for further verification in the future. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021238871, identifier: CRD42021238871.
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.