ArticleBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2026
Ultrasound-Guided Ovulation Monitoring Versus Home Ovulation Tests and Psychosocial Outcomes in Subfertile Couples: Prospective Cohort Study.
Article in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess whether ultrasound-guided ovulation monitoring, compared to home ovulation tests, increases stress levels or impairs sexual function in subfertile couples.
designA prospective cohort study.
settingAcademic medical centre from November 2023 to October 2024. POPULATION: A total of 311 subfertile couples are trying to conceive.
methodsSubfertile couples were allocated to two groups: the ultrasound-guided ovulation monitoring group and the home ovulation tests group and were surveyed over four menstrual cycles. Stress, anxiety, depression, and sexual function of both partners were investigated through questionnaires.
main outcome measuresPerceived stress scale.
resultsDuring the four menstrual cycles, neither significant between-group differences nor group-by-cycle interaction effects were observed for stress, anxiety, or depression in either partner (all p > 0.05). However, a significant cycle effect was identified over the 4 cycles: anxiety levels increased in women (p = 0.037), while both anxiety (p < 0.020) and depression (p < 0.001) rose significantly in men. Additionally, across the study period, women's Female Sexual Function Index scores (p = 0.021) and men's erectile function (p < 0.001) showed a significant decline. In terms of pregnancy outcomes, the ultrasound-guided group achieved a pregnancy rate twice that of the test group (adjusted OR = 2.12, 95% CI 1.32-3.39, p = 0.002).
conclusionUltrasound-guided ovulation monitoring shortens time to conception, with no evidence of increased emotional distress or impaired sexual function.
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.