SynthesisFertility and sterility2024
A systematic review of reproductive technologies for shared conception in same-sex female couples.
Synthesis in Fertility and sterility, 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.
- Comparison of Intrauterine Insemination Success Rates Using Donor Sperm Between Heterosexual and Female Couples: A Retrospective Cohort Study.JBRA assisted reproduction · 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
Abstract
Reciprocal in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intravaginal culture (IVC) are two technologies that allow same-sex female couples to jointly contribute biologically to a pregnancy. This systematic review aimed to synthesize the clinical outcomes of each method including live birth rate, clinical pregnancy rate, embryo quality, and perinatal complications. A dual-reviewer protocol identified eight studies on reciprocal IVF and ten studies on IVC. In retrospective studies reporting on a total of 1,405 reciprocal IVF cycles, reciprocal IVF has demonstrated similar cycle and pregnancy outcomes to autologous IVF. One study that reported on pregnancy complications found a comparable rate of hypertensive disease in pregnancy between patients undergoing reciprocal IVF and intrauterine insemination. However, a lack of prospective studies on reciprocal IVF limits the generalizability of these results. Overall, small prospective and retrospective studies reporting on a total of 776 IVC cycles show that IVC offers good cycle and pregnancy outcomes, comparable to IVF. However, randomized prospective studies reported that the rate of quality embryo creation in IVC may be lower than in IVF. Although both reciprocal IVF and IVC show promise for same-sex female couples and the larger lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, asexual, and other sexual or gender minorities community, this review has highlighted the need for larger, prospective, more diverse studies on methods of shared biological contribution for family building.
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.