ReviewCureus2026
The Association Between Pre-cycle Maternal Vitamin D Status and Reproductive Outcomes in Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vitamin D has been increasingly recognized for its potential role in reproductive physiology, particularly in endometrial receptivity and implantation. Despite growing interest, the impact of serum vitamin D status on outcomes of frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles remains debated. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the association between maternal vitamin D concentrations and reproductive success, specifically clinical pregnancy (CPR) and live birth rates (LBR), during frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles, effectively focusing on the role of endometrial receptivity A systematic search was conducted in CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE, and Scopus for observational studies published until November 2025. Eligible studies compared reproductive outcomes in women with low versus normal serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels before autologous FET. The women were categorized as vitamin D insufficient if the level was <20 ng/ml and <30 ng/ml in different studies. The primary outcomes were the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and live birth rate (LBR). Data were pooled using a random-effects model, and the risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Four cohort studies comprising 2,061 FET cycles were included in the analysis. In the overall pooled analysis, low vitamin D levels were associated with lower odds of clinical pregnancy; however, this association did not reach statistical significance (OR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.12-1.08), likely due to substantial heterogeneity among studies (I²=92.7%). When the analysis was restricted to high-quality research (involving 1,769 cycles), heterogeneity was eliminated (I²=0%), demonstrating a significant reduction in the likelihood of clinical pregnancy for patients with vitamin D deficiency (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.99; p=0.03). Similarly, pooled analysis of live birth outcomes demonstrated a borderline reduction in live birth rates in the low vitamin D group, although this finding did not reach statistical significance (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.60-1.04; p=0.08). Vitamin D deficiency appears to be associated with adverse reproductive outcomes in FET cycles, particularly when analyzing high-quality data. These findings suggest that low vitamin D levels are associated with adverse FET outcomes. However, as this review was limited to observational studies, these results identify deficiency as a prognostic marker rather than proving that screening and repletion directly optimize implantation and pregnancy success. Therefore, vitamin D sufficiency appears to be associated with poorer reproductive outcomes in (FET) cycles, but high-quality randomized trials are needed to establish definitive recommendations.
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.