SynthesisJBRA assisted reproduction2025
Ovulation triggers in unassisted reproduction, an old question still unanswered: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in JBRA assisted reproduction, 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.
- Mesenchymal stem cell-based therapeutic strategies for female infertility: current evidence and emerging targeting approaches.Biotechnology letters · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate whether ovulation triggers improve pregnancy and/or ovulation rates in women with unexplained or anovulatory infertility undergoing ovulation induction and natural intercourse or intrauterine insemination (IUI), without increasing complications.
methodsWe searched nine databases and grey literature from inception to August 29, 2023. Parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including women with unexplained or anovulatory infertility undergoing ovulation induction and natural intercourse or IUI, comparing ovulation trigger versus placebo or no treatment, were included. Outcomes included pregnancy, ovulation, and complications. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool, and GRADE was applied for certainty of evidence. The Hartung-Knapp random-effects model was used to calculate odds ratio (ORs) (α=0.05). R packages "metafor", "meta", and "metasens" were used.
resultsSix studies (1,218 women) were included; all studies used hCG as the trigger. For clinical pregnancy (n=855, 4 studies), OR=1.23 (95% CI: 0.91-1.66); for live birth (n=45, 2 studies), OR=0.92 (95% CI: 0.14-6.02); for miscarriage (n=89, 3 studies), OR=0.68 (95% CI: 0.20-2.35); for ovulation (n=311, 2 studies), OR=1.70 (95% CI: 0.84-3.43); and for multiple pregnancy (n=523, 2 studies), OR=2.56 (95% CI: 0.43-15.11). No subgroup analysis altered certainty of evidence and risk of bias was low.
conclusionsCurrent evidence is insufficient to recommend or refute ovulation triggers. hCG may increase ovulation, but effects on pregnancy outcomes remain uncertain.
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.