MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231383337 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000410

Gonadotrophin therapy for ovulation induction in subfertility associated with polycystic ovary syndrome

2000· review· en· W4231383337 on OpenAlexaff
David Nugent, Patrick Vanderkerchove, Edward G. Hughes, Michelle I. Arnot, Richard Lilford

Post-publication record

NatureRetraction
ReasonRetract and Replace;
Date8/24/2015 0:00
Flagged by OpenAlex?Yes

Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOvulation inductionMenotropinsOvulationPolycystic ovaryAnovulationFollicle-stimulating hormonePregnancyInternal medicineOvarian hyperstimulation syndromeHormoneGynecologyEndocrinologyLuteinizing hormoneIn vitro fertilisationBiologyInsulinInsulin resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Approximately 15% of patients with PCOS remain anovulatory despite treatment with oral anti-oestrogen medications such as clomiphene citrate. In addition, about half of women with PCOS ovulating on anti-oestrogen treatment fail to conceive. Gonadotrophin stimulation is the next step in treatment for women who are "clomiphene resistant", however, results of gonadotrophin stimulation in women with PCOS are less successful. In PCOS associated with hypersecretion of LH, purified urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (u-FSH) preparations have theoretical advantages over the use of human menopausal gonadotrophin (hMG) preparations (containing both FSH and LH), but whether this claimed advantage extends into clinical practice remains uncertain. In addition, the use of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRH-a) to produce pituitary desensitisation prior to ovulation induction in PCOS has been claimed to increase the success rates of treatment as well as reduce complications such as OHSS and multiple pregnancy. Gonadotrophin preparations have also been administered via different routes (intramuscular or subcutaneous), or using different stimulation regimens and protocols (step-up or standard) in an attempt to improve efficacy. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of urinary-derived gonadotrophins as ovulation induction agents in patients with PCOS trying to conceive. In particular, to assess the effectiveness of (1) different gonadotrophin preparations, (2) the addition of a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) to gonadotrophin stimulation and (3) different modalities of gonadotrophin administration. SEARCH STRATEGY: The search strategy to identify RCTs consisted of (1) the Group's Specialised Register of Controlled Trials using the search strategy developed for the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group as a whole (see the Review Group details for more information), (2) additional specific electronic Medline searches and (3) bibliographies of identified studies and narrative reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs in which urinary-derived gonadotrophins were used for ovulation induction in patients with primary or secondary subfertility attributable to PCOS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Twenty three RCTs were identified, 9 of which were excluded from analysis. The data were extracted independently by 2 authors. The following criteria were assessed: (1) the methodological characteristics of the trials, (2) the baseline characteristics of the studied groups and (3) the outcomes of interest: pregnancy rate (per cycle), ovulation rate (per cycle), miscarriage rate (per pregnancy), multiple pregnancy rate (per pregnancy), overstimulation rate (per cycle) and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate (per cycle). Where suitable, meta-analysis was performed using Peto's OR with 95% CI with the fixed effect Mantel-Haentszel equation. MAIN RESULTS: (1) A reduction in the incidence of OHSS with FSH compared to hMG in stimulation cycles without the concomitant use of a GnRH-a (OR 0.20; 95% CI 0.08-0.46) and (2) a higher overstimulation rate when a GnRH-a is added to gonadotrophins (OR 3.15; 95% CI 1.48-6.70). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Although 14 RCTs were included in this review, few dealt with the same comparisons, all were small to moderate size and their methodological quality was generally poor. Any conclusions, therefore, remain tentative as they are based on a limited amount of data and will require further RCTs to substantiate them. In none of the comparisons was there a significant improvement in pregnancy rate but this may be due to the lack of power (i.e. insufficient patients randomised to demonstrate a significant difference between treatments). There was a trend towards better pregnancy rates with the addition of a GnRH-a to gonadotrophin stimulation and these interventions warrant further study. Despite theoretical advantages, urinary-derived FSH preparations did not improve pregnancy rates when compared to traditional and cheaper hMG preparations; their only demonstrable benefit was a reduced risk of OHSS in cycles when administered without the concomitant use of a GnRH-a. No conclusions can be drawn on miscarriage and multiple pregnancy rates due to insufficient reporting of these outcomes in the trials.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.145
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations80
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207