ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2023
Associations of personal care products use with reproductive outcomes of IVF/ICSI treatment.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reevaluating statistical methods for proportion-based laboratory outcomes in assisted reproduction.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Review
- Clinicopathological predictors of central lymph node metastasis in clinically node-negative papillary thyroid carcinoma: a retrospective cohort analysis.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Personal care products (PCPs) contain a number of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) that could potentially affect the reproductive function in women of childbearing age. However, studies focused on the effects of PCPs use on reproductive outcomes are very limited. The current study aimed to explore the relationships between PCPs use patterns and reproductive outcomes in women undergoing Methods: A total of 1500 women from the Tongji Reproductive and Environmental (TREE) study between December 2018 and January 2020 were included in this study. Participants provided characteristics of PCPs use within the previous three months. Retrieved oocyte number, mature oocyte number, two distinct pronuclei (2PN) zygote number, fertilization rate, cleavage rate, blastocyst formation rate, implantation, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth were followed up as reproductive endpoints. Generalized linear regression model was utilized to assess the associations between various categories of PCPs use and reproductive endpoints of IVF/ICSI. Results: After adjusting for relevant covariates, women who used skin care products ≥14 times per week had a reduction of 22.4% in the maturation rate (95% CI: -39.2%, -1.6%) compared to participants who did not use skin care products. After transferring fresh embryos, women who used cosmetics 1-2 times per week (adjusted OR = 2.2, 95% CI: 1.0, 4.8) or 3-7 times per week (adjusted OR = 2.5, 95% CI: 1.2, 5.2) had a higher possibility of miscarriage than those who did not use cosmetics. There was negative association between the use of gel or soap and the cleavage rate among women aged < 30 years old ( Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the use of PCPs in women of reproductive age have a potential adverse impact on IVF/ICSI outcomes, particularly skin care and cosmetic products.
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.