ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Late follicular phase progesterone levels and
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To study whether the impact of serum progesterone level on the day of hCG administration on reproductive outcomes varies across age groups and ovarian stimulation protocols in fresh in fresh Methods: This single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2014 to December 2024 and included 24,868 women undergoing their first fresh embryo transfer following an IVF or ICSI cycle at a university-affiliated fertility center. The exposure was serum progesterone level measured on the day of hCG administration. Primary outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), miscarriage rate (MR) and live birth rate (LBR). Results: In women aged <35 years, progesterone was inversely associated with CPR (fully adjusted aOR=0.868, 95% CI 0.812-0.927, P<0.001) but positively associated with LBR after adjustment (aOR=1.090, 95% CI 1.019-1.167, P = 0.013). No significant effects were observed in patients aged ≥35 years. The progesterone-outcome relationship was significantly modified by protocol, with a nonlinear inverted U-shaped curve in GnRH-agonist protocols (interaction P<0.001 for CPR, P = 0.005 for LBR). In protocol-stratified analyses, progesterone was independently associated with reduced CPR in ultra-long GnRH-agonist (aOR=0.814, 95% CI 0.718-0.922, P = 0.001) and GnRH-antagonist protocols (aOR=0.849, 95% CI 0.771-0.936, P = 0.001), but not in the long GnRH-agonist protocol. The effect on LBR was positive in the long GnRH-agonist protocol (aOR=1.105, 95% CI 1.013-1.205, P = 0.024) and negative in the GnRH-antagonist protocol (aOR=0.884, 95% CI 0.788-0.991, P = 0.035). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the superiority of GnRH-agonist protocols across all progesterone levels (all adjusted P<0.01). Conclusion: The association between late follicular progesterone elevation and reproductive outcomes differs across ovarian stimulation protocols, demonstrating a nonlinear relationship with both clinical pregnancy and live birth. These results suggest that late follicular progesterone elevation should be interpreted with protocol-specific considerations.
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.