ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2026
Outcomes from a trainee-run ovulation induction program at a large urban safety net hospital.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo improve access to fertility care at the largest safety net hospital in New York City, fellows and residents run a reproductive endocrinology and infertility clinic that supports an ovulation induction (OI) program under attending physician supervision. Our objective was to evaluate OI pregnancy outcomes to describe the program's efficacy and guide quality improvement.
methodsWe performed a descriptive study of patients who completed at least one OI cycle from 6/1/2019 to 4/1/2023. Fellows and residents managed patient care, including the prescription of an OI agent (clomiphene citrate or letrozole), ultrasound monitoring, and trigger (human chorionic gonadotropin) followed by timed intercourse (TIC) or intrauterine insemination (IUI). Primary outcomes included the overall pregnancy rate (PR) and live birth rate (LBR).
resultsTwo hundred twenty-eight patients were prescribed OI agents during the study period. Of these, 161 patients (70.6%) completed at least one OI cycle and were not lost to follow up. The PR and LBR per patient were 21.1% (34/161) and 11.2% (18/161). The PR and LBR per cycle were 9.0% (34/379) and 4.7% (18/379). Patients who achieved a pregnancy were younger (median 32.5 years vs. 36 years, p < 0.002), had a higher AMH (median 3.2 vs. 2.1 ng/mL, p < 0.03), and were more likely to have PCOS (35.3% vs. 18.9%, p < 0.04). Among the 228 patients ever-prescribed an OI agent, there were 22 (9.6%) patients with pregnancies that occurred without OI treatment.
conclusionsPRs from this low-resource OI program are comparable to published data, demonstrating that fellow and resident-run initiatives can be successful in bridging the gap in fertility care.
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.