SynthesisPloS one2024
Economic evaluation of lifestyle interventions in infertility management: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Economic evaluation of lifestyle interventions in infertility management: A systematic review.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Complementary Interventions Using Technology for Individuals With Infertility Using Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Scoping Review.Nursing & health sciences · 2025Article
- Global, regional, and national burden and trends of reproductive-aged male and female infertility from 1990-2021.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Mental health of couples affects fertility, modified by socioeconomic status: a couple-based analysis.Human reproduction open · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInfertility, a global concern affecting both sexes, is influenced by modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors. While the literature predominantly underscores the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of lifestyle interventions in the realm of infertility treatment, a holistic compilation analysing the economic dimensions of such interventions is lacking. This systematic review aimed to fill this gap by evaluating the economic facets of lifestyle interventions in the management of infertility.
methodsAn exhaustive search was conducted within the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases from their inception to February 2024. The aim was to find articles related to the economic aspects of lifestyle interventions in infertility management. These included clinical studies covering economic outcomes and economic evaluations. The Drummond Checklist was used to assess the quality of the included studies.
resultsFrom an initial yield of 7555 articles, five studies were deemed eligible for inclusion, comprising three cost-effectiveness analyses, one prospective cohort study and a randomized controlled trial, all of which were undertaken in high-income countries (the Netherlands, Australia and Japan). These studies included patients receiving infertility treatments for conditions such as unexplained infertility, polycystic ovary syndrome, ovulation disorders, or mild male infertility, inclusive of individuals with and without obesity. The women who participated in these studies were up to 45 years of age. The findings suggested that integrating lifestyle intervention programmes tends to enhance pregnancy and live birth outcomes. These programmes encompass coaching, psychological or behavioural guidance, nutritional adjustments, exercise regimes, weight management, smoking cessation and mindfulness techniques. Moreover, these interventions are likely to be more cost-effective than standard infertility care.
conclusionFor couples embarking on infertility treatments, the integration of lifestyle interventions into their management strategy not only fosters clinical benefits but also represents a cost-effective alternative to conventional care, particularly within high-income settings.
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.