Observational studyJBRA assisted reproduction2024
Intrauterine insemination: prognostic factors.
Observational study in JBRA assisted reproduction, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing outcomes in intrauterine insemination: A narrative synthesis of two decades of clinical research (2000-2024).International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Review
- Observational
- Non-linear and context-dependent association of maternal BMI with cumulative live birth in Chinese women undergoing intrauterine insemination: a retrospective study of 3788 cycles.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Letrozole yields superior pregnancy outcomes and safety profile compared with clomiphene citrate in intrauterine insemination cycles: a propensity score matching analysis.American journal of translational research · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the impact of possible maternal and paternal prognostic factors and ovarian stimulation protocols on clinical pregnancy and live birth rates in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles.
methodsRetrospective observational study of 341 IUI cycles performed from January 2016 to November 2020 at the Assisted Reproduction Service of the Clinics Hospital of the Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo. Clinical pregnancy and live birth rates and their potential prognostic factors were evaluated. Wilcoxon's non-parametric test was used to compare quantitative variables, and the chi-square test to compare qualitative variables, adopting a significance level of p<0.05. A logistic regression model was performed to verify which exploratory variables are predictive factors for pregnancy outcome.
resultsThe ovulation induction protocol using gonadotropins plus letrozole (p=0.0097; OR 4.3286, CI 1.3040 - 14.3684) and post-capacitation progressive sperm ≥ 5million/mL (p=0.0253) showed a statistically significant correlation with the live birth rate. Female and male age, etiology of infertility, obesity, multifollicular growth, endometrial thickness ≥ 7 mm, and time between human chorionic gonadotropin administration and IUI performance were not associated with the primary outcomes. In the group of patients with ideal characteristics (women aged< 40 years, BMI < 30 kg/m2, antral follicle count ≥ 5, partner aged< 45 years, and post-capacitation semen with progressive spermatozoa ≥ 5 million/mL), the rate of clinical pregnancy was 14.8%, while that of live birth, 9.9%.
conclusionsIn this study, the ovulation induction protocol with gonadotropins plus letrozole and post-capacitation progressive sperm ≥ 5 million/mL were the only variables that significantly correlated with intrauterine insemination success.
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.