ArticleContraception and reproductive medicine2026
Duration of progesterone exposure before frozen embryo transfer impacts live birth rates following single vitrified-thawed day 6 blastocyst transfer: a multicenter cohort study.
Article in Contraception and reproductive medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Optimizing the Endometrial Factor in Recurrent Implantation Failure: From Established Diagnostics to Mechanism-Informed Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
research questionDoes administering progesterone for 6 days prior to frozen embryo transfer (FET) improve live birth rate (LBR) compared to 5 days of progesterone exposure when transferring blastocysts expanded on Day 6 (D6)?
methodsThis multicenter retrospective cohort study included 1,639 single FET cycles using D6 blastocysts under hormone replacement therapy (HRT) between January 2018 and December 2023. Cycles were stratified by duration of progesterone priming: 6 days (P6 group, n = 1,122) or 5 days (P5 group, n = 517). The primary outcome was LBR; secondary outcomes included biochemical and clinical pregnancy rates, miscarriage rate, and neonatal outcomes (birth weight and gestational age at delivery). Generalized estimating equation (GEE) regression models were used to adjust for potential confounders. Subgroup analyses by PGT status and sensitivity analyses restricted to first FET cycles or good-quality blastocysts were also conducted.
resultsThe P6 group demonstrated a significantly higher LBR than the P5 group (33.87% [380/1,122] vs. 24.95% [129/517]; P < 0.001). After multivariable adjustment, the P6 regimen remained independently associated with increased LBR (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.72; 95% CI 1.32–2.19; P < 0.001). Biochemical pregnancy (51.96% vs. 37.72%; aOR 2.10; 95% CI 1.64–2.62) and clinical pregnancy rates (46.52% vs. 33.66%; aOR 1.94; 95% CI 1.50–2.47) were also significantly higher with 6 days of progesterone priming. No significant differences were observed in miscarriage rates or neonatal outcomes between groups. Sensitivity analyses including restriction to first FET cycles, good-quality blastocysts, or stratification by blastocyst ploidy status did not alter the primary findings.
conclusionExtending progesterone exposure to 6 days before FET is associated with a significantly higher live birth rate compared with a 5-day protocol in transfers of vitrified–thawed Day 6 blastocysts. These findings warrant confirmation in prospective, large-scale randomized controlled trials. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable
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.