ArticleAsian journal of andrology2025
Should couples with a low total progressively motile sperm count in the first intrauterine insemination cycle continue this treatment?
Article in Asian journal of andrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractThis study aimed to investigate the associations between the post-wash total progressively motile sperm count (TPMSC) in the first intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycle and pregnancy outcomes of the second IUI cycle. Data were retrieved from the clinical database at the Reproductive Center of Peking University Third Hospital (Beijing, China) between January 2011 and December 2022. Couples were included in this retrospective cohort study if they had unexplained or mild male factor infertility and were treated with IUI for two consecutive cycles using the same protocol. A total of 8290 couples were included in the analysis. The mean ± standard deviation (s.d.) age of women was 32.0 ± 3.5 years. We categorized groups based on the post-wash TPMSC (×10 6 ) levels in the first IUI cycle: group 1 (0 < TPMSC < 1, n = 1290), group 2 (1 ≤ TPMSC < 2, n = 863), group 3 (2 ≤ TPMSC < 3, n = 800), group 4 (3 ≤ TPMSC < 4, n = 783), group 5 (4 ≤ TPMSC < 5, n = 1541), group 6 (5 ≤ TPMSC < 6, n = 522), group 7 (6 ≤ TPMSC < 7, n = 547), group 8 (7 ≤ TPMSC < 8, n = 175), group 9 (8 ≤ TPMSC < 9, n = 556), group 10 (9 ≤ TPMSC < 10, n = 192), and group 11 (TPMSC ≥ 10), n = 1021). The primary outcome was live birth rate of the second IUI cycle. Live birth rates were 7.9%, 5.8%, 7.6%, 7.4%, 7.3%, 8.4%, 7.5%, 7.4%, 8.8%, 8.9%, and 7.6% in each group, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in clinical pregnancy rates or live birth rates between any groups and those with the post-wash TPMSC <1 × 10 6 . In an IUI program for unexplained and mild male factor infertility, the post-wash TPMSC in the first IUI cycle was not significantly associated with the live birth rate in the second IUI cycle.
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.