Cited by 198Reproductive Health and TechnologiesAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyReproductive System and Pregnancy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Randomized Trial of Endometrial Scratching before In Vitro Fertilization

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Endometrial scratching (with the use of a pipelle biopsy) is a technique proposed to facilitate embryo implantation and increase the probability of pregnancy in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial. Eligible women were undergoing IVF (fresh-embryo or frozen-embryo transfer), with no recent exposure to disruptive intrauterine instrumentation (e.g., hysteroscopy). Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either endometrial scratching (by pipelle biopsy between day 3 of the cycle preceding the embryo-transfer cycle and day 3 of the embryo-transfer cycle) or no intervention. The primary outcome was live birth. RESULTS: A total of 1364 women underwent randomization. The frequency of live birth was 180 of 690 women (26.1%) in the endometrial-scratch group and 176 of 674 women (26.1%) in the control group (adjusted odds ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.27). There were no significant between-group differences in the rates of ongoing pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, or miscarriage. The median score for pain from endometrial scratching (on a scale of 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating worse pain) was 3.5 (interquartile range, 1.9 to 6.0). CONCLUSIONS: Endometrial scratching did not result in a higher rate of live birth than no intervention among women undergoing IVF. (Funded by the University of Auckland and others; PIP Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12614000626662 .).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa1808737

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

2 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 43 references

1 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Nastri CO, Gibreel A, Raine-Fenning N, et al. Endometrial injury in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;7:CD009517-CD009517.22786529

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–198 of 198

Metadata

Authors
Lensen, S., Osavlyuk, D., Armstrong, S., Stadelmann, C., Hennes, A., Napier, E., Wilkinson, J., Sadler, L., Gupta, D., Strandell, A., Bergh, C., Vigneswaran, K., Teh, W. T., Hamoda, H., Webber, L., Wakeman, S. A., Searle, L., Bhide, P., McDowell, S., Peeraer, K., Khalaf, Y., & Farquhar, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • Royal Women's Hospital (AU)
  • University College Hospital (GB)
  • Guy's Hospital (GB)
  • From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Auckland (S.L., D.O., C.F.), and Women’s Health (L. Sadler) and Fertility Plus (D.G., C.F.), Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, Fertility Associates, Christchurch (S.A.W.), and Fertility Associates, Wellington (L. Searle, S.M.) — all in New Zealand; Bath Fertility Centre, Bath (S.A., E.N.), the Department of Medical Statistics, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester (J.W.), and the Department of Obstetrics and...
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2019-01-24
Volume
380
Issue
4
Pages
325-334
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2913330914
Cited by
198
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 25
FWCI
31.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Maurice & Phyllis Paykel Trust
  • Auckland District Health Board, New Zealand
  • Nurture Foundation for Reproductive Health, New Zealand
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
Keywords
endometrial scratching, Pipelle biopsy, in vitro fertilization, live birth, embryo implantation, pregnancy outcomes, procedural pain, frozen embryo transfer, fresh embryo transfer
MeSH terms
Adult, Embryo Transfer, Endometrium, Female, Fertilization in Vitro, Humans, Pain Measurement, Pregnancy, Odds Ratio, Treatment Outcome, Live Birth

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review