SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015
Assisted reproductive technology: an overview of Cochrane Reviews.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 172 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endometrial injection of embryo culture supernatant for subfertile women in assisted reproduction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Temperature of embryo culture for assisted reproduction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Neonatal interventions for preventing cerebral palsy: an overview of Cochrane Systematic Reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Mesenchymal Stem Cells (MSCs) Therapy for Recovery of Fertility: a Systematic Review.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2018Pooled it
- Antenatal and intrapartum interventions for preventing cerebral palsy: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Interventions for the prevention of OHSS in ART cycles: an overview of Cochrane reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- The impact of operative hysteroscopy on pregnancy outcomes in patients with suspected uterine cavity lesions prior to the first frozen-thawed embryo transfer: a retrospective propensity-score matching cohort study.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Precision medicine in premature ovarian insufficiency: a focus on the precision therapeutic strategies for mesenchymal stem cells.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Review
- A weakly-supervised follicle segmentation method in ultrasound images.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Nano-encapsulated senolytic cocktail attenuates germ cell senescence in female mice.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2025Article
- Article
- Therapeutic Potential of Different Injection Methods for Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation in Buslfan-Induced Male Rat Infertility.Journal of stem cells & regenerative medicine · 2024Article
- Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes After Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Retrospective Cohort Study in China.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Endometriosis Associated Infertility: A Critical Review and Analysis on Etiopathogenesis and Therapeutic Approaches.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Review
- Article
- Article
- Quality ratings of reviews in overviews: a comparison of reviews with and without dual (co-)authorship.Systematic reviews · 2018Review
- Cancer Risk in Women Treated with Fertility Drugs According to Parity Status-A Registry-based Cohort Study.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2017Article
- What guidance is available for researchers conducting overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions? A scoping review and qualitative metasummary.Systematic reviews · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs many as one in six couples will encounter problems with fertility, defined as failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy after regular intercourse for 12 months. Increasingly, couples are turning to assisted reproductive technology (ART) for help with conceiving and ultimately giving birth to a healthy live baby of their own. Fertility treatments are complex, and each ART cycle consists of several steps. If one of the steps is incorrectly applied, the stakes are high as conception may not occur. With this in mind, it is important that each step of the ART cycle is supported by good evidence from well-designed studies.
objectivesTo summarise the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews on procedures and treatment options available to couples with subfertility undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART).
methodsPublished Cochrane systematic reviews of couples undergoing ART (in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection) were eligible for inclusion in the overview. We also identified Cochrane reviews in preparation, for future inclusion.The outcomes of the overview were live birth (primary outcome), clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, miscarriage and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (secondary outcomes). Studies of intrauterine insemination and ovulation induction were excluded.Selection of systematic reviews, data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken in duplicate. Review quality was assessed by using the AMSTAR tool. Reviews were organised by their relevance to specific stages in the ART cycle. Their findings were summarised in the text and data for each outcome were reported in 'Additional tables'. MAIN
resultsFifty-nine systematic reviews published in The Cochrane Library up to July 2015 were included. All were high quality. Thirty-two reviews identified interventions that were effective (n = 19) or promising (n = 13), 14 reviews identified interventions that were either ineffective (n = 2) or possibly ineffective (n = 12), and 13 reviews were unable to draw conclusions due to lack of evidence.An additional 11 protocols and five titles were identified for future inclusion in this overview. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThis overview provides the most up to date evidence on ART cycles from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials. Fertility treatments are costly and the stakes are high. Using the best available evidence to optimise outcomes is best practice. The evidence from this overview could be used to develop clinical practice guidelines and protocols for use in daily clinical practice, in order to improve live birth rates and reduce rates of multiple pregnancy, cycle cancellation and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.