Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36142268›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2022

Molecular Clues to Understanding Causes of Human-Assisted Reproduction Treatment Failures and Possible Treatment Options.

Jan Tesarik, Raquel Mendoza-Tesarik

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 45% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Implantation Failure: Where to Look Up?Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jan TesarikMARGen Clinic, 18006 Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-4645-5804
Raquel Mendoza-TesarikMARGen Clinic, 18006 Granada, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

More than forty years after the first birth following in vitro fertilization (IVF), the success rates of IVF and of IVF-derived assisted reproduction techniques (ART) still remain relatively low. Interindividual differences between infertile couples and the nature of the problems underlying their infertility appear to be underestimated nowadays. Consequently, the molecular basis of each couple's reproductive function and of its disturbances is needed to offer an individualized diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to each couple, instead of applying a standard or minimally adapted protocols to everybody. Interindividual differences include sperm and oocyte function and health status, early (preimplantation) embryonic development, the optimal window of uterine receptivity for the implanting embryo, the function of the corpus luteum as the main source of progesterone production during the first days of pregnancy, the timing of the subsequent luteoplacental shift in progesterone production, and aberrant reactions of the uterine immune cells to the implanting and recently implanted embryos. In this article, the molecular basis that underlies each of these abnormalities is reviewed and discussed, with the aim to design specific treatment options to be used for each of them.

Indexed as

InfertilityProgesteroneEmbryonic DevelopmentFemaleFertilization in VitroHumansMalePregnancyPregnancy RateSemenTreatment FailureProgesteroneearly miscarriageembryo cleavage arrestfertilization failureimplantation failureluteal phaseluteoplacental shiftoocyte aneuploidyoocyte cytoplasmic defectssperm DNA damagesperm epigenetic abnormalities

Identifiers

PMID36142268
PMCPMC9499616
OpenAlexW4296110249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.