MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377565386 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15833

Is glucocorticoid use associated with a higher clinical pregnancy rate of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer? A meta-analysis

2023· article· en· W4377565386 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yaxuan Lv, Chen Yue, Lei Hu, Haitian Ding, Mengqing Liu, Hailong Li, Yuyang Hou, Qiong Xing

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian function and disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPregnancyPublication biasMedicineJadad scaleMeta-analysisEmbryo transferSubgroup analysisIn vitro fertilisationPregnancy rateCochrane LibraryObstetricsFunnel plotInternal medicineGynecologyBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background It has been reported that the use of glucocorticoids may be able to improve clinical pregnancy rates in patients receiving in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET). The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between glucocorticoid use and clinical pregnancy rate in IVF-ET patients. Methods This study has been registered on the International Register of Prospective Systems Evaluation (PROSPERO) (ID: CRD42022375427). A thorough and detailed search of databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library was conducted to identify eligible studies up to October 2022. Quality assessment was conducted on the modified Jadad Scoring Scale and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and the inter-study heterogeneity was estimated by Q test and I 2 test. Combined hazard ratios with 95% CI were calculated using random effects or fixed effects models based on heterogeneity. Meanwhile, Begg's and Egger's tests were used to detect the existence of publication bias, the leave-one-out method was used for sensitivity analysis and multiple subgroup analyses were conducted. Results Seventeen studies involving 3056 IVF-ET cycles were included. We found that glucocorticoid use was associated with a higher IVF-ET pregnancy rate (OR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.27–2.74, P = 0.002). In the subgroup analysis, studies of different regions and different study types all showed similar results that glucocorticoid is beneficial to improve the clinical pregnancy rate of patients with IVF-ET, and patients with positive autoantibodies and patients receiving IVF-ET multiple times also showed the same results. However, there was no significant change in clinical pregnancy rates in the seven studies with negative autoantibodies and in the seven studies with initial IVF-ET treatment. The results of the 12 medium-acting glucocorticoids and 4 long-acting glucocorticoids were also generally consistent with each other. There was no statistical difference in subgroup analysis of whether patients had endometriosis or not. Conclusion Appropriate use of glucocorticoids is beneficial for improving the clinical pregnancy rate in women receiving IVF-ET, but this result still needs to be verified by more high-quality and large sample size randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.054
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicOvarian function and disordersFrench-language works237,207