ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Reproductive outcomes following assisted reproductive technology after previous caesarean section: data from the Swiss National Registry.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Caesarean section rates have risen worldwide, exceeding the rate of 10%-15% recommended by the WHO. This increase is driven by factors such as advanced maternal age, broader indications for caesarean section (CS), and increased use of assisted reproductive treatment (ART). Previous research, including meta-analyses, suggests that prior CS delivery (CSD) negatively affects the reproductive outcomes in ART, such as lower live birth rates (LBR) and potential subfertility, although the quality of the evidence is variable. Obstetric complications associated with CSD, for instance, uterine rupture and placental abnormalities, highlight the need for further investigation. This study therefore evaluates the impact of CSD on ART outcomes using a comprehensive national registry. Materials and methods: This study includes a cohort of 3,266 women who underwent caesarean section delivery ( Results: The characteristics of the patients in both study groups were similar. Following the first embryo transfer, the clinical pregnancy rates were lower after CSD in univariate analysis (38.7% vs. 43.4%; Conclusions: A history of caesarean section was associated with lower clinical pregnancy rates across successive embryo transfers following ART. No significant association was observed after the first embryo transfer following multivariable adjustment, and miscarriage rates were not affected by the mode of the previous delivery. Further prospective studies, including imaging assessment of caesarean scar defects and isthmocele, are required to determine whether the observed association is related to caesarean section itself or to secondary scar pathology.
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.