Question · asked by 1 review
ART with seminal plasma vs standard ART (IVF, ICSI, and frozen embryo transfer): Adverse events, including infectious complications
- Population
- Women undergoing ART (IVF, ICSI, or frozen embryo transfer)
- Intervention
- ART with seminal plasma
- Comparison
- standard ART (IVF, ICSI, and frozen embryo transfer)
- Outcome
- Adverse events, including infectious complications
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
ART with seminal plasma vs standard ART (IVF, ICSI, and frozen embryo transfer) Adverse events, including infectious complications · Women undergoing ART (IVF, ICSI, or frozen embryo transfer) The review found no eligible studies for this question. Application of seminal plasma to female genital tract prior to embryo transfer in assisted reproductive… (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Application of seminal plasma to female genital tract prior to embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology cycles (IVF, ICSI and… 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
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.