ArticleF&S reports2025
Observational cohort study exploring MediEmo smartphone application use, live birth, and in vitro fertilization treatment return rates.
Article in F&S reports, 2025. 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.
- App-assisted in vitro fertilization: the way of the future?F&S reports · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To explore the associations between the use of the MediEmo smartphone application and in vitro fertilization (IVF) live birth and treatment return rates. Design: A 3-year observational cohort study. Subjects: Patients undergoing IVF were classified as users if they used the medication or emotion features of the MediEmo. Patients who did not use the two key features or declined to use the application were classified as nonusers. Exposure: The use of the MediEmo smartphone application. Main outcome measures: Outcomes of interest were the rate of live birth per fresh index cycle, live birth per complete cycle, and treatment return for a stimulated cycle of treatment within 12 months of the unsuccessful stimulated index cycle. Results: A total of 1,081 patients were eligible to use the MediEmo application, 863 were categorized as users and 218 as nonusers. MediEmo use was associated with a higher live birth rate per index cycle than nonusers (27.81% [n = 240/863] vs. 19.26% [n = 42/218], respectively, OR, 1.248; 95% CI, 1.041-1.509) and treatment return rate compared with nonusers (46.00% [n = 169/363] vs. 31.37% [n = 32/102], respectively, OR, 1.339; 95% CI, 1.092-1.656). It was not associated with the live birth rate per complete cycle. Conclusion: The observed positive association between MediEmo use and live birth and treatment return rates suggests benefits to patients and clinics. Further research and replication using a randomized controlled trial design are warranted, as is investment in the development of digital tools for use during IVF treatment.
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.