ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2022
The RNA-seq based endometrial receptivity test (rsERT) compared to pinopode: A better diagnostic tool for endometrial receptivity for patients with recurrent implantation failure in Chinese population.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- The efficacy of RNA-seq-based endometrial receptivity test (rsERT) in guiding personalized embryo transfer in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome without recurrent implantation failure: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Trial
- Multi-omics biomarkers in endometrial receptivity: from mechanisms to clinical translation.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Review
- Multi-omics biomarkers in female fertility: from oocyte quality to endometrial receptivity and clinical translation.Biomarker research · 2026Review
- Research progress on non-invasive testing of endometrial receptivity.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Review
- Inflammatory proteomics of uterine fluid is potentially a non-invasive predictor for endometrial receptivity: a pilot study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Review
- The study on the clinical efficacy of endometrial receptivity analysis and influence factors of displaced window of implantation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Precise hourly personalized embryo transfer significantly improves clinical outcomes in patients with repeated implantation failure.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Personalized embryo transfer guided by rsERT improves pregnancy outcomes in patients with repeated implantation failure.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Endometrial proteomic profile of patients with repeated implantation failure.Frontiers in endocrinology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Displaced window of implantation (WOI) is one of the endometrial origins that accounts for implantation failure, especially for patients with recurrent implantation failure (RIF), yet no standard diagnostic tool has been recognized. The study consists of two parts, aiming to compare the concordance and efficacy of the diagnostic tools, the newly developed RNA-seq based endometrial receptivity test (rsERT) to the conventional pinopode, in diagnosing WOI and guiding personalized embryo transfer (pET). With the same group of RIF patients, the rsERT diagnosed 32 patients (65.31%) with normal WOIs, and most of the displacements were advancements (30.61%). While according to pinopode, only 14 patients (28.57%) were found with normal WOIs, and most patients (63.27%) presented delayed growth patterns. After conducting pET, patients in the rsERT group had higher successful pregnancy rates while requiring fewer ET cycles (50.00% vs. 16.67%, p=0.001). The study proved poor consistency between the diagnostic tools of endometrial receptivity based on cellular structure and gene profiling, and it supported rsERT as a reliable tool with potential clinical value.
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.