ReviewCureus2024
Role of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) in Unexplained Infertility Management: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of fertility treatments on headache disorders: a systematic review with an overview of treatment modalities.The journal of headache and pain · 2026Pooled it
- The Lived Experience of Couples Undergoing In Vitro Fertilisation in Greece: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Cell-free DNA in female infertility: from pathological mechanisms to clinical biomarkers.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unexplained infertility presents a significant reproductive challenge globally, affecting couples who are unable to conceive despite comprehensive fertility evaluations. This condition carries emotional, physical, and economic burdens, with a moderate to high prevalence, underscoring the need for effective interventions. In vitro fertilization (IVF) has emerged as a crucial treatment option for unexplained infertility, offering a unique approach to conception when traditional diagnostic tests fail to identify specific causes. However, the efficacy, safety, and comparative benefits of IVF in this context warrant comprehensive evaluation through systematic reviews. A systematic review was conducted to assess the effectiveness and outcomes of IVF in cases of unexplained infertility. Inclusion criteria encompassed peer-reviewed studies focusing on human subjects diagnosed with unexplained infertility and evaluating IVF outcomes. Comprehensive searches were performed across electronic databases, and eligible studies were selected based on predetermined criteria. Data extraction was conducted independently by two researchers, and quality assessment was performed using standardized tools. The search yielded 10 studies comprising 73,884 patients, published between 2000 and 2021. Variability in methodological quality was observed across randomized controlled trials, while cohort studies demonstrated consistently high quality. Studies assessed outcomes like pregnancy success rate (46.2-47.9%), live birth rates (29.4-49%), time to pregnancy (9-14 months), cost-effectiveness, and adverse events such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Elective single embryo transfer (eSET) was found effective, and donor oocytes had higher live birth rates than autologous cycles. Multiple gestations and canceled IVF cycles were common. The systematic review underscores the complexity of IVF treatment for unexplained infertility, with variability in outcomes influenced by multiple factors. Strategies such as eSET and donor oocyte cycles show promise in optimizing treatment efficacy and safety. However, challenges such as heterogeneity, moderate to high risk of bias across studies, and cost considerations warrant careful interpretation and further research.
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.