↓ Skip to main content

Therapeutic effect of acupuncture on the outcomes of in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
13 X users
facebook
14 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Therapeutic effect of acupuncture on the outcomes of in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00404-016-4255-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yi Qian, Xin-Ru Xia, Humphrey Ochin, Cun Huang, Chao Gao, Li Gao, Yu-Gui Cui, Jia-Yin Liu, Yan Meng

Abstract

Controversial results have been reported concerning the effect of acupuncture on in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes. The current review was conducted to systematically review published studies of the effects of acupuncture on IVF outcomes. Women undergoing IVF in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were evaluated for the effects of acupuncture on IVF outcomes. The treatment groups involved traditional, electrical, laser, auricular, and other acupuncture techniques. The control groups consisted of no, sham, and placebo acupuncture. The PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched. The pregnancy outcomes data are expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) based on a fixed model or random model depending on the heterogeneity determined by the Q test and I2 statistic. The major outcomes were biochemical pregnancy rate (BPR), clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), live birth rate (LBR), and ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR). Heterogeneity of the therapeutic effect was evaluated by a forest plot analysis, and publication bias was assessed by a funnel plot analysis. Thirty trials (a total of 6344 participants) were included in this review. CPR data showed a significant difference between the acupuncture and control groups (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.06-1.50, p = 0.01), but there was significant statistical heterogeneity among the studies (p = 0.0002). When the studies were restricted to Asian or non-Asian area trials with a sensitivity analysis, the results significantly benefited the CPR in Asian group (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.04-2.20, p = 0.03). Based on the area subgroup analysis, we found that in the Asian group, the IVF outcomes from the EA groups were all significantly higher than those from the control groups (CPR: OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.20-2.72, p = 0.005; BPR: OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.12-3.02, p = 0.02; LBR: OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.44-3.88, p = 0.0007; OPR: OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.03-3.64, p = 0.04). Meanwhile, compared with other acupuncture time, the IVF outcome results were significantly superior in the acupuncture group when acupuncture was conducted during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) (CPR: OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.27-2.29, p = 0.0004; LBR: OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.54-3.78, p = 0.0001; BPR: OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.02-2.20, p = 0.04; OPR: OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.06-3.34, p = 0.03). However, when acupuncture was conducted at the time of embryo transfer, the BPR and OPR from the acupuncture groups were significantly lower than those of the controls in the Asian group (BPR: OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48-0.92, p = 0.01; OPR: OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49-0.96, p = 0.03). Based on an analysis of the studies, acupuncture improves the CPR among women undergoing IVF. When the studies were restricted to Asian or non-Asian area patients, compared with traditional acupuncture and other methods, electrical acupuncture yielded better IVF outcomes. Optimal positive effects could be expected using acupuncture in IVF during COH, especially in Asian area. However, as a limitation of this review, most of the included studies did not mention the number of embryos transferred.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ireland 1 1%
Unknown 81 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 21%
Other 8 10%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 24 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 15%
Unspecified 3 4%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 24 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 23 December 2020.
All research outputs
#2,180,050
of 23,981,346 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
#93
of 2,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,922
of 426,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
#4
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,981,346 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,191 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 426,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.