ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes after Poor-Quality Embryo Transfer and Prognostic Parameters.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to investigate the clinical results following poor-quality embryo transfer and the parameters to foresee the prognosis. In this study, 2123 cycles that had day 3 and day 5 single-fresh embryo with poor-quality embryo transfers and good-quality embryo transfers were compared. The cycles according to transfer day were evaluated by conducting a subgroup analysis. The correlation between all the obtained demographic characteristics, controlled ovarian stimulation parameters, and cycle results were analysed. Clinical pregnancy was established in 53 patients that underwent transfer in the poor-quality embryo group (14.9%). Of these patients, 36 had live birth (live birth rate per clinical pregnancy 67.9%). In cleavage-stage embryos, live birth rates per clinical pregnancy were higher in poor-quality blastocyst transfer. When analysing the factors affecting live births in the poor-quality embryo group, as the total gonadotropin dose increases, the probability of live birth decreases, as in the probability of hCG positivity. In conclusion, although the probability of pregnancy is low, when clinical pregnancy is established, there is a high chance of having a live birth after poor-quality embryo transfers. This could be regarded as an acceptable option in cycles when only poor-quality embryos are available.
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.