ArticleJournal of ovarian research2025
The impact of COVID-19 infection on ART outcomes: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Protecting laboratory air quality and comparing clinical assisted reproductive technology cycle outcomes before, during and after wildfire events: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- COVID-19 and female reproductive health: pathophysiological mechanisms and clinical reproductive outcomes.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- The COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences on men's reproductive health.Biophysical reviews · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis multicenter retrospective study examines the impact of female COVID-19 infection on assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes, including clinical pregnancy rates, miscarriage rates, and live birth rates, and further evaluated potential influencing factors associated with these outcomes.
methodsOur multicenter retrospective cohort study analyzed 10,140 cycles (2021-2023) from 10 Beijing ART centers, comparing 4,099 cycles from COVID-19-positive women with 6,041 age-matched (1:1.5) COVID-negative controls (pre-pandemic). Outcomes included pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth rates, analyzed via logistic regression.
resultsIn our study, maternal COVID-19 infection showed no significant association with ART outcomes, including clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and live birth. However, subtle differences were still observed. Among women with prior COVID-19 infection, compared to those with transfers ≥ 90 days post-infection (16.1%), miscarriage rates were significantly higher in the < 30 days (20.5%, p = 0.055) and 30-60 days (20.4%, p = 0.032) groups, whereas no increase was observed in the 60-90 days group (15.3%, p = 0.912). Additionally, advanced maternal age and elevated FSH levels (> 10 mIU/mL) were associated with diminished clinical pregnancy and live birth rates. What's more, maternal COVID-19 symptoms and medication use did not significantly affect ART treatment outcomes.
conclusionsOur results suggest that while maternal COVID-19 infection does not clearly affect overall ART outcomes, embryo transfer within 60 days may increase miscarriage risk. This provides useful guidance for timing treatment during COVID-19 and future public health emergencies. IN BRIEF: Our study found that while a history of the female partner's COVID-19 infection does not significantly impact ART outcomes, miscarriage rates are higher when embryo transfer occurs within 60 days post-infection. We recommend waiting at least 60 days after infection to minimize miscarriage risk.
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.