ArticleBMJ open2025
Fertility treatments and stroke: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesFertility therapies are becoming an increasingly common option for conception, but there is little knowledge on the interactions of assisted reproductive technology (ARTs) and stroke in women, and its use among women with a history of stroke. This scoping review aims to examine the current state of knowledge and identify the knowledge gaps regarding: (1) the stroke risk with use of fertility therapy and (2) the safety of fertility therapy among stroke survivors, to help guide future research and clinical practice.
designThe PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) checklist for scoping reviews was followed. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (Ovid), Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), Medline, ClinicalTrials.gov and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched through 20 June 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: All observational studies pertaining to use of fertility and stroke in humans over the age of 18 were included in this review. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Title and abstract and subsequent full-text review were performed by two independent reviewers in duplicate. A narrative synthesis of final articles for data abstraction is presented.
results10 studies met inclusion criteria. The only meta-analysis that was included could not estimate the risk of stroke among all individuals undergoing fertility therapy due to lack of high-quality prospective cohort studies. There was only one prospective cohort that examined pregnancy among stroke survivors. Among the 32 pregnancies, one was conceived through in vitro fertilisation (IVF), although the details regarding stroke type, time since stroke, medications and IVF protocol were not specified. Therefore, the safety and effectiveness of ART among stroke survivors is currently unknown.
conclusionIn this comprehensive review of existing fertility therapy science and stroke risk, we identify a large knowledge gap and a major scientific need for a systematic approach and prospective studies to better inform the risk of stroke during fertility therapy, especially among stroke survivors. Understanding this risk and developing treatment strategies serves to better inform women and healthcare providers as more women with a history of stroke seek and contemplate fertility therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/PHQ4X.
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.