| Title |
Myo-inositol supplementation reduces the amount of gonadotropins and length of ovarian stimulation in women undergoing IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00404-018-4861-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antonio Simone Laganà, Amerigo Vitagliano, Marco Noventa, Guido Ambrosini, Rosario D’Anna |
| Abstract |
To evaluate whether oral myo-inositol supplementation (MI) is able to reduce the amount of gonadotropins (GA) and the length of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (SL) in both Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS) and non-PCOS women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). We performed a systematic review (PROSPERO ID: CRD42017069439) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We searched articles published in English between January 1985 to August 2017, using the combination of the Medical Subject Headings "Inositol" with "Ovulation Induction", "follicle-stimulating hormone, human, with HCG C-terminal peptide", "Reproductive Techniques, Assisted", and "Fertilization in Vitro". We collected data about GA and SL comparing MI to no treatment or D-Chiro-Inositol (DCI) supplementation (controls). A subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate selected outcomes in PCOS and non-PCOS women. We included 8 studies embedding 812 participants. We found a reduction in GA (p < 0.00001) and SL (p = 0.0007) in patients receiving MI with respect to controls. MI was effective in both PCOS (p < 0.00001) and non-PCOS women (p = 0.02) in reducing GA; conversely, MI supplementation decreased the SL only in PCOS women (p < 0.00001). During IVF, MI is effective in both PCOS and non-PCOS women in saving gonadotropins, but reduces efficiently SL only in PCOS women. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Italy | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 69 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 14 | 20% |
| Unknown | 23 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 35% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 27 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 June 2022.
All research outputs
#6,478,735
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
#352
of 2,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,956
of 331,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
#5
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,066 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,641 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.