ArticleJournal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association2024
Demographic distributions and clinical results of assisted reproduction techniques in Turkey in 2019: a descriptive survey.
Article in Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- In-depth analysis of the demographic landscape and clinical outcomes of assisted reproductive technologies in Türkiye: a comprehensive survey for the years 2020 and 2021.Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to describe characteristics and outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles performed in 2019 in Turkey. Material and Methods: One-hundred and sixty-five ART centers in Turkey were invited to submit data. The survey was sent to center directors via e-mail with anonymous links by Qualtrics™. The survey involved questions about their patient characteristics, clinical practices, and outcomes. Results: Forty-one (24.8%) centers responded to e-mails, and data gathered from 25 centers was included in the analyses. In 25 centers, 18,127 fresh or frozen transfers were carried out during the study period, of which 7796 (43.0%) were fresh and the rest were either frozen (45.2%) or embryo transfers (ET) with preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) (11.8%). The live birth rate per ET was as 30.6%, 40.1%, and 50.7% in fresh, frozen and PGT cycles, respectively. A single embryo was transferred in 65.3% of all transfers and singleton live births comprised 86.1% of all deliveries. For cycles with intrauterine insemination, 1407 were started in 2019, and 195 clinical pregnancies, 150 live births with 19 multiple pregnancies occurred. A total of 1513 ART cycles were initiated for foreign patients. Russia (29.6%), Germany (7.4%), Iraq (4.6%), Uzbekistan (3.1%), and Syria (1.4%) were the top five countries with most patients coming to Turkey for ART. Conclusion: The survey results are in parallel with the reports of international institutions and organizations. With repeated editions, the data collected with annual surveys can be used to inform ART practices in the coming years.
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.