ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2026
Association of daily perceived stress with fertility outcomes in natural and controlled ovarian stimulation cycles: a feasibility study.
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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeFemales with infertility perceive stress, but most studies rely on single assessments. We examined the feasibility of repeated ecological momentary assessment (EMA) during IVF and whether stress trajectories across two cycles were associated with reproductive and IVF outcomes.
methodsIn a prospective cohort at a single academic center, 26 females (18-42 years) undergoing IVF with luteal estradiol priming were recruited; 25 completed follow-up. Perceived stress was assessed via text-message EMA three times daily during a priming month and the subsequent controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) cycle. Primary outcomes were ovulation in the priming cycle and a composite poor COS outcome (cycle cancellation, < 4 oocytes retrieved, no blastocyst, or no euploid blastocyst). Functional principal components analysis characterized stress trajectories, and regression models tested associations with outcomes.
resultsMean age was 36 (SD 3.6); 64% were White and 24% Hispanic. All participants ovulated during priming. Two stress patterns explained 96% of follicular-phase variability. The dominant pattern (early decline then plateau) was not associated with outcomes. A second pattern (peak around cycle day 6 with subsequent rise) was associated with lower peak LH (b - 2.85, 95% CI - 4.60 to - 1.06; adjusted p = 0.004). Ten participants (40%) met the composite poor COS outcome, which was not associated with either stress pattern. Stress levels were similar between priming and COS.
conclusionEMA is feasible during IVF. In patients reporting mild-to-moderate stress, perceived stress was stable and not associated with key IVF outcomes, though specific trajectories may modestly relate to hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian-axis function.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42498851What 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.