Clomiphene and anti-oestrogens for ovulation induction in PCOS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Subfertility due to anovulation is a common problem in women. First-line oral treatment is with anti-oestrogens, for example clomiphene citrate, but resistance (failure to ovulate) may be apparent with clomiphene. Alternative and adjunctive treatments have been developed such as tamoxifen, dexamethasone, and bromocriptine. OBJECTIVES: To determine the relative effectiveness of anti-oestrogen agents alone or in combination with other medical therapies in women with subfertility associated with anovulation, possibly caused by polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS). SEARCH STRATEGY: A search was conducted using the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register (May 2009), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2009), and EMBASE (1980 to May 2009) for identification of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The United Kingdom National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines and the references of relevant reviews and RCTs were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs comparing oral anti-oestrogen agents for ovulation induction (alone or in conjunction with medical therapies) in anovulatory subfertility were considered. Insulin sensitising agents, aromatase inhibitors, and hyperprolactinaemic infertility were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data extraction and quality assessment were done independently by two review authors. The primary outcome was live birth; secondary outcomes were pregnancy, ovulation, miscarriage, multiple pregnancy, overstimulation, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, and women reported adverse effects. MAIN RESULTS: This is a substantive update of a previous review. Fifteen RCTs were included. One trial reported live birth. Miscarriage, multiple pregnancy rates and adverse events were poorly reported.Clomiphene was effective in increasing pregnancy rate compared to placebo (OR 5.8, 95% CI 1.6 to 21.5) as was clomiphene plus dexamethasone treatment (OR 9.46, 95% CI 5.1 to 17.7) compared to clomiphene alone. No evidence of a difference in effect was found between clomiphene versus tamoxifen or clomiphene in conjunction with human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) versus clomiphene alone.The remaining results had only one study in each comparison. A significant improvement in the pregnancy rate was reported for clomiphene plus combined oral contraceptives versus clomiphene alone. No evidence of a difference in effect on pregnancy rate was found with any of the other comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review shows evidence supporting the effectiveness of clomiphene citrate and clomiphene in combination with dexamethasone for pregnancy rate only. There is limited evidence on the effects of these drugs on outcomes such as miscarriage. Evidence in favour of these interventions is flawed due to the lack of evidence on live births.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".