ArticleJournal of human reproductive sciences
Prevalence and use of Alternative Medicine Treatments and Supplements in Couples with Infertility: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Journal of human reproductive sciences. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Use of indigenous and alternative medicines for illnesses is common in India. Studies on the use of complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) in Western countries have shown that a significant percentage of men and women with infertility use alternative therapies. Unfortunately, there is no such data specific to the Indian population. Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and use of CAM treatments and supplements in couples with infertility. Settings and Design: The study was a prospective cross-sectional survey study conducted in an urban assisted reproductive centre attached to a private hospital. Materials and Methods: All patients presenting with infertility of 1 year or more who consented to participate in the study were interviewed to collect anonymised data on their use of CAM for infertility treatment, including duration of use, treatment costs, adverse effects and information about the prescriber. Statistical Analysis Used: Data were analysed using SPSS v26. Descriptive statistics summarised demographics and use of CAM. Associations were tested using Fisher's Exact Test and Mann-Whitney Results: 271 couples consented to the study. Most were well-educated, and dealing with primary infertility. CAM use was more common among women (10%) than men (5.5%), with Ayurveda being the most frequently used, followed by homeopathy. Herbal medicine use was rare. CAM usage was associated with longer durations of infertility in both genders, and with longer duration of marriage in men ( Conclusion: CAM use for infertility was less common than expected, and linked to longer infertility duration.
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.