ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for poor ovarian response in assisted reproductive technology.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and validate a predictive model for poor ovarian response (POR) in patients undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART). Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 1,789 patients who underwent IVF/ICSI with a GnRH antagonist protocol at the reproductive medicine center of Shenyang Women's and Children's Hospital between January 2020 and December 2023. Data from January 2020 to April 2023 were used for model development, and data from May 2023 to December 2023 was used for validation. Clinical and ovarian reserve markers were collected. Four prediction models were developed and compared: (1) logistic regression with stepwise selection, (2) full-variable logistic regression, (3) LASSO regression with the minimum lambda (λ_min) criterion, and (4) LASSO regression with the 1-standard error (1-SE) rule. The optimal model was selected based on discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, AUC), calibration, and Brier score. Results: The final model, based on stepwise logistic regression, identified AMH, basal FSH, BMI, and antral follicle count as significant predictors of POR. The model exhibited high discriminatory ability and good calibration across the training, internal validation, and test datasets. The nomogram developed from this model provides an easy-to-use tool for individualized risk prediction, enabling clinicians to optimize treatment strategies for patients at risk of POR. Conclusion: This study provides a comprehensive predictive model for POR in ART, incorporating a wide range of clinical and ovarian reserve markers. The stepwise logistic regression model offers superior predictive accuracy and clinical utility, making it a valuable tool for personalized ART management. The nomogram developed enhances decision-making in ART by offering an intuitive, evidence-based method for predicting POR risk.
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.