SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
The efficacy of acupuncture on endometrial receptivity in infertile women: an overview of systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy of acupuncture for recurrent implantation failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
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
Background and objective: Endometrial receptivity (ER) enhancement is crucial in managing infertility. Although systematic reviews (SRs) have investigated acupuncture's potential to improve ER in infertile women, the evidence remains fragmented due to insufficient quality assessment. This overview aimed to rigorously evaluate the reporting quality, methodological rigor, risk of bias, and evidence confidence of existing SRs, while synthesizing clinical evidence on acupuncture's efficacy and safety for ER enhancement in infertility. Search strategy: Seven databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang) were systematically searched from inception to March 1, 2025, using combined subject headings and free-text terms ("acupuncture therapy," "endometrial receptivity," "infertility," "systematic review"). Inclusion criteria: SRs investigating acupuncture's therapeutic effects on ER in infertile women were eligible. Data extraction and analysis: Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. Methodological quality, reporting completeness, bias risk, and evidence certainty were evaluated using validated tools: AMSTAR 2, ROBIS, PRISMA-A, and GRADE. Results: From 524 screened records, 10 SRs (published 2019-2023, encompassing 7-25 RCTs each) were included. Methodological quality assessed by AMSTAR 2 showed that all 10 SRs exhibited critically low quality. Reporting quality assessed by PRISMA-A showed that overall completeness >70%, but deficiencies in protocol registration (50%) and funding disclosure (10%). Risk of bias assessed by ROBIS showed that only one SR had low risk of bias. As to the evidence confidence, among the 55 evaluated outcomes, 92.72% (51/55) were low/very low quality (2 high, 2 moderate, 24 low, 27 very low). Descriptive analyses suggested that combining acupuncture with other treatments (medications, Chinese herbal medicine, and IVF-ET) may improve pregnancy and ovulation rates, with a high to moderate quality of evidence. Conclusion: Current evidence supporting acupuncture for ER enhancement is predominantly low quality, limited by critical methodological weaknesses and heterogeneity. While combination therapies show preliminary promise, definitive conclusions require high-quality RCTs with standardized outcome measures. Systematic review registration: This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024497881).
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.