ArticleCureus2025
Clinical Outcomes of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) Versus Intrauterine Insemination (IUI) in Infertile Patients: Toward Evidence-Based Fertility Planning.
Article in Cureus, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Infertility poses a significant reproductive health burden, and assisted reproductive technologies (ART) such as intrauterine insemination (IUI) and in vitro fertilization (IVF) are widely used treatments. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of IVF and IUI in infertile women to inform evidence-based fertility planning. Methods A total of 300 infertile women were analyzed, evenly distributed into IVF (150, 50%) and IUI (150, 50%) groups. Baseline demographics, hormonal markers, and infertility characteristics were assessed. Clinical outcomes, including pregnancy and live birth rates, were compared. Statistical analyses included t-tests, chi-squared tests, correlation analysis, logistic regression, and machine learning modeling. Results The overall clinical pregnancy rate was 119 (39.7%). IVF yielded a significantly higher pregnancy rate (69, 46%) compared to IUI (50, 33.3%) (χ²=4.15; p=0.042). Similarly, live birth was more frequent in the IVF group (61, 40.7%) than the IUI group (41, 27.3%) (χ²=4.84; p=0.028). Adverse outcomes included multiple pregnancies in 15.9% of IVF vs. 6% of IUI cases. Higher success was noted in women aged <30 (IVF: 52.3%; IUI: 39.2%). Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) were significantly correlated with pregnancy outcomes (AMH: r=0.38 and p<0.001; FSH: r=-0.25 and p=0.011). Logistic regression identified IVF (OR=1.68), AMH (OR=1.52), and FSH (OR=0.81) as significant predictors. A random forest model achieved 73.1% accuracy. Conclusions IVF demonstrated superior clinical outcomes over IUI. Hormonal profiling and early IVF consideration may improve ART success in selected infertile patients.
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.