Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39399814›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in reproductive health2024

From patient classification to optimized treatment in ART: the AMPLITUDE Delphi consensus.

Christophe Blockeel, Anne Guivarc'h-Leveque, Catherine Rongieres, Nelly Swierkowski-Blanchard, Géraldine Porcu-Buisson, Chadi Yazbeck, Christine Wyns

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in reproductive health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Freeze all for all- is it justified?Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Christophe BlockeelBrussels IVF, Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Anne Guivarc'h-LevequeService of Reproductive Medicine, Clinique Mutualiste La Sagesse, Rennes, France.
Catherine RongieresDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France.
Nelly Swierkowski-BlanchardReproductive Medicine Center, Intercommunal Hospital Center, Poissy, France.
Géraldine Porcu-BuissonDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, Institut de Médecine de la Reproduction, Marseille, France.
Chadi YazbeckObstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, Reprogynes Medical Institute, Paris, France.
Christine WynsDepartment of Gynecology-Andrology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: A Delphi consensus was performed to evaluate expert opinions on the management of key aspects of ovarian stimulation. Methods: A Scientific Committee developed eleven statements for patient profiles corresponding to predicted ovarian responses (low, normal, and high) based on antral follicle count (AFC) and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH). The statements were distributed (online survey) to French and Belgian fertility specialists. Consensus was reached when ≥66.7% of participants agreed or disagreed. Results: Among 52 respondents, a consensus agreement was reached for each patient profile for personalizing the initial dose of gonadotropin, taking age, weight, body mass index, nature of the cycle, and the decision to perform a fresh transfer or a freeze-all strategy into consideration. The respondents preferred a fresh transfer for low and normal responders and a freeze-all strategy in case of high risk of hyperstimulation, newly diagnosed uterine or tubal pathology and premature progesterone elevation. A consensus was reached for 10-15 oocytes as optimal oocyte target from the first round of voting. The panel agreed to increase the gonadotropin dose in case of insufficient response and preferred a GnRH antagonist protocol for a subsequent cycle in case of excessive response. Finally, a consensual answer was obtained for using LH/hCG activity in case of hypogonadotropic hypogonadism, advanced age, inadequate response during first stimulation and suspected FSH receptor polymorphism. Discussion: The AMPLITUDE consensus supports the importance of optimizing the ovarian stimulation protocol for patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatment. Additional studies could complete these findings and guide fertility specialists in their daily practice to improve ovarian stimulation outcomes.

Indexed as

assisted reproductive technologydose personalizationgonadotropinovarian responseovarian stimulation

Identifiers

PMID39399814
PMCPMC11466932

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.