ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Ovulation induction or artificial programmed protocol: which endometrial preparation approach is more favorable in reducing obstetrical and neonatal complications for ovulation disorder patients undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer?
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Several endometrial preparation protocols are available in frozen-thawed embryo (FET) transfer cycles. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes, obstetrical and neonatal complications between ovulation disorder patients undergoing FET with ovulation induction protocol and patients with artificial programmed protocol. Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study using propensity-score matching (PSM) was conducted. Ovulation disorder women undergoing FET using ovulation induction medicine Letrozole (OI group), or estrogen/progesterone (EP) for endometrial preparation were included. Clinical outcomes, obstetrical and neonatal complications were compared before and after PSM. Multiple logistic regression models were performed to demonstrate the independent impact of endometrial protocols on pregnancy outcomes. Results: A total of 552 women in OI group and 3344 women in EP group were included. As for pregnancy outcomes after PSM, patients in OI group were with significantly higher live birth rate (38.1% vs. 33.4%; P = 0.042), and lower early spontaneous miscarriage rate (13.1% vs. 18.9%; P = 0.032). In singleton birth, the prevalence of GDM (7.9% vs. 14.6%; P = 0.037), and LBW (7.9% vs. 14.1%; P = 0.042) was significantly lower in patients from OI group as compared with EP group. In patients after PSM, after adjusting for covariates, EP protocol was a risk factor of early spontaneous miscarriage rate (OR = 1.450, 95%CI: 1.085-1.963; P = 0.029), GDM (OR = 1.627, 95%CI: 1.288-2.601; P = 0.034), and LBW (OR = 1.852, 95%CI: 1.127-2.250; P = 0.041). Conclusion: As compared with EP protocol, using Letrozole to achieve endometrial preparation prior to FET may yield a decreased risk of early spontaneous miscarriage rate, GDM, and as well as LBW in ovulation disorder patients undergoing FET.
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.