ArticleF&S reports2026
Whole systems traditional Chinese medicine utilization among women undergoing frozen embryo transfers at an academic fertility center.
Article in F&S reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To investigate sociodemographic and clinical variables associated with Whole Systems Traditional Chinese Medicine (WS-TCM) utilization alongside frozen embryo transfers (FETs) after in vitro fertilization. Design: We conducted a retrospective review of all autologous FETs performed within an academic medical center's fertility clinic between January 2019 and March 2024. One FET cycle per patient was randomly selected for analysis. After conducting bivariate analyses, a logistic regression model was employed to examine independent associations with WS-TCM utilization. Subjects: Women aged 21-42 who underwent an FET after in vitro fertilization. FETs involving donor egg embryos, gestational carriers, and those with missing live birth outcome data were excluded. Exposure: Attending ≥1 WS-TCM appointment between 120 days pre- and 12 days post-FET. Whole Systems Traditional Chinese Medicine treatment modalities included individualized acupuncture, nutritional and lifestyle modifications, and focused dietary supplements. Main Outcome Measures: Sociodemographic and clinical variables associated with WS-TCM utilization. Results: Of 799 women studied, 162 (20.3%) utilized WS-TCM, receiving a median of 5.5 treatments between 120 days pre- and 12 days post-FET. Whole Systems Traditional Chinese Medicine users resided in neighborhoods with higher median income ($83,025 vs. $75,602). Previous medical histories of women incorporating WS-TCM included higher rates of migraine/headache (21.6% vs. 13.3%), musculoskeletal pain (37.0% vs. 27.5%), recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL; 25.9% vs. 12.9%), pain associated with genital organs (21.0% vs. 14.1%), and undergoing more assisted reproductive technology cycles. Higher neighborhood median income (adjusted odds ratio and 95% confidence interval: 1.36 [1.13, 1.64]), recurrent pregnancy loss (2.15 [1.33, 3.47]), and undergoing ≥3 vs. 0-1 assisted reproductive technology cycles (1.78 [1.02, 3.06]) were independently associated with higher odds of WS-TCM engagement, whereas higher body mass index (0.79 [0.64, 0.97]), undergoing preimplantation genetic testing (0.61 [0.39, 0.94]), and having a history of salpingitis/oophoritis/pelvic inflammatory disease (0.59 [0.37, 0.92]) or high-risk pregnancy supervision (0.53 [0.30, 0.93]) were associated with lower odds. Conclusion: Within this cohort, multiple pain- and reproductive health-related diagnoses were more prevalent among individuals utilizing WS-TCM. Findings inform factors that may influence clinicians' and patients' decisions to refer or pursue WS-TCM (e.g., migraine, musculoskeletal pain, RPL) and covariates that should be accounted for in future observational studies of WS-TCM's effectiveness.
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.