Relationship Between Sleep Disturbances and In Vitro Fertilization Outcomes in Infertile Women: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In vitro fertilization (IVF) has been acknowledged as the primary assisted reproductive technique for fertilizing oocytes outside the female reproductive system. Sleep disorders are likely to affect infertility and its treatment. The present study was to investigate the relationship between sleep disturbances and IVF outcomes in infertile women. METHODS: Databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, and Web of Science, were searched for the relevant articles published up to September 2023. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Moreover, the random and fixed effects models using the STATA (v.11) software program presented the odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Ultimately, a funnel plot was recruited to examine the sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: During the initial search, 426 articles were retrieved, and ultimately, nine studies remained for systematic review, and among them, four studies entered into the meta-analysis (two cohort and two cross-sectional studies). According to the fixed effects model of the cross-sectional studies, the association between sleep quality and pregnancy rate was not confirmed (OR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.81-1.07). Regarding the fixed effects model of included cohort studies, the results indicated an association between sleep quality and the pregnancy rate (OR = 1.08; 95% CI = 1.03-1.14). According to the random effects model of the cross-sectional studies, there was no significant association between sleep quality and pregnancy rate (OR = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.37-1.26). Regarding the random effect analysis of included cohort studies, the results indicated an association between sleep quality and the pregnancy rate (OR = 1.08; 95% CI = 1.03-1.14). Based on the total fixed effect analysis of the cross-sectional and cohort studies, the results also showed a significant association between sleep quality and pregnancy rate among infertile women (OR = 1.06; 95% CI = 1.01-1.11). In contrast, according to the random effect of the total studies, this association was not confirmed (OR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.90-1.14). CONCLUSION: Although the meta-analysis of the cohort studies showed a significant association between sleep quality and IVF outcomes, such as pregnancy rate, due to the novelty of the subject, more studies have not been published, and this study is considered a preliminary meta-analysis. Therefore, more studies with a strong methodology need to assess the relationship between sleep disorders and IVF outcomes.
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 | 0.011 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.033 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".