Intentional endometrial injury vs no intervention or a sham procedure: Live birth or ongoing pregnancy
It is very uncertain whether intentional endometrial injury changes live birth or ongoing pregnancy compared with either no intervention or a sham procedure (very low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Intentional endometrial injury vs either no intervention or a sham procedure Live birth or ongoing pregnancy · women trying to get pregnant from intercourse or intrauterine insemination (IUI) It is very uncertain whether intentional endometrial injury changes live birth or ongoing pregnancy compared with either no intervention or a sham procedure (very low certainty). Endometrial injury for pregnancy following sexual intercourse or intrauterine insemination (2016) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD011424.PUB2, superseded | RR 2.22 [1.56, 3.15] | 6 studies · 950 participants | Very low |
Intentional endometrial injury vs either no intervention or a sham procedure Live birth or ongoing pregnancy ‐ sensitivity · women trying to get pregnant from intercourse or intrauterine insemination (IUI) It is very uncertain whether intentional endometrial injury changes live birth or ongoing pregnancy ‐ sensitivity compared with either no intervention or a sham procedure (very low certainty). Endometrial injury for pregnancy following sexual intercourse or intrauterine insemination (2016) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD011424.PUB2, superseded | RR 2.64 [1.03, 6.82] | 1 study · 105 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Endometrial injury for pregnancy following sexual intercourse or intrauterine insemination 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.