ArticleMedicine2026
Clinical outcomes of long follicular-phase protocol in first-cycle patients with diminished ovarian reserve and AMH<1.2 ng/mL: A single-center study.
Article in Medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to compare the outcomes of assisted reproductive treatment in women with low ovarian reserve (LOR), defined as an anti-Müllerian hormone level of ≤1.2 ng/mL, versus normal ovarian reserve (NOR; 1.2 ng/mL < anti-Müllerian hormone ≤3.0 ng/mL) using the long follicular-phase protocol. It further evaluates the efficacy of the long follicular-phase, antagonist, and progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocols specifically within the LOR population. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 2309 patients treated between October 2022 and October 2024. Participants included 973 LOR patients and 1336 NOR patients. LOR patients were divided by protocol: Group A (long follicular-phase protocol, n = 95), Group C (antagonist, n = 200), and Group D (PPOS, n = 678). All NOR patients received the long follicular protocol (Group B, n = 1336). Groups were stratified by age (<35 and ≥35 years). Regarding the long follicular protocol: In women <35, Group A had significantly fewer retrieved oocytes and high-quality embryos than Group B (P <.05), yet clinical pregnancy and live birth rates (LBRs) were similar (P >.05). In women ≥35, Group A had fewer oocytes but a higher MII rate than Group B, with no significant difference in pregnancy or live birth rates. Comparing protocols within the LOR population: Group A exhibited significantly lower baseline hormone levels but higher numbers of punctured follicles, retrieved oocytes, and 2PN fertilized oocytes compared to Groups C and D (P <.05). Notably, among patients ≥35, Group A produced significantly more high-quality embryos. Generally, age negatively impacted outcomes across all groups. For individuals with LOR, the long follicular-phase protocol yields clinical pregnancy and live birth rates comparable to those with normal reserve, despite lower oocyte yield. Our research findings, while not conclusive in the LOR population, suggest a possible trend that long follicular-phase protocol may offer certain advantages over antagonist and PPOS protocols in key experimental parameters. Nevertheless, age remains a key factor affecting stimulation response.
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.