ArticleInternational journal of reproductive biomedicine2023
Does body mass index compromise assisted reproductive technique outcomes? A cross-sectional study.
Article in International journal of reproductive biomedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stop gonadotropin-releasing hormone-agonist protocol not superior to antagonist protocol on the outcomes of assisted reproductive techniques in poor responders: A randomized clinical trial.International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2026Article
- Predictive Value of Serum Progesterone Levels on The Day of Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer in Determining Pregnancy Outcomes in Infertile Women: A Cohort Prospective Study.International journal of fertility & sterility · 2025Article
- Follicular fluid meiosis activating sterol supplementation enhances oocyte maturation and fertilization in a microfluidic system: A lab trial study.International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Overweight and obese people face several health problems. Female obesity has been shown to reduce fertility in the general population. Assisted reproductive technology outcomes in obese cases are widely studied, but the results are inconclusive. Objective: This study aimed to compare live birth rate (LBR) among women with 4 different types of body mass index (BMI). Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, data of 1611 women, who were candidates for fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles, was extracted from 2051 medical files at the Reproductive Sciences Institute, Yazd, Iran from May 2019-May 2021. The participants were divided into 4 groups (underweight, normal, overweight, and obese) according to their BMI, and LBR was considered to be the main outcome. Results: Of 1611 women, 39 were underweight, 585 were normal, 676 were overweight, and 311 were obese. Underweight women had the lowest LBR (12.8%), but there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.55). In addition, LBR was compared in the 4 BMI groups according to age, type of transfer cycle (fresh or freeze), and cause of infertility, and there was comparable LBR in the 4 BMI groups. However, metaphase 2 oocyte rate, doses of gonadotropin usage in the cycles, and estradiol level had statistically significant differences (p Conclusion: According to our study, obesity does not affect LBR in the IVF cycle, regardless of fresh or frozen embryo transfer cycles, different age groups, and causes of infertility.
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.