The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Two new prediction rules for spontaneous pregnancy leading to live birth among subfertile couples, based on the synthesis of three previous models
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Several models have been published for the prediction of spontaneous pregnancy among subfertile patients. The aim of this study was to broaden the empirical basis for these predictions by making a synthesis of three previously published models. METHODS: We used the original data from the studies of Eimers et al. (1994), Collins et al. (1995) and Snick et al. (1997) on couples consulting for various forms of subfertility. We developed a so-called three-sample synthesis model for predicting spontaneous conception leading to live birth within 1 year after intake based on the three data sets. The predictors used are duration of subfertility, women's age, primary or secondary infertility, percentage of motile sperm, and whether the couple was referred by a general practitioner or by a gynaecologist (referral status). The performance of this model was assessed according to a 'jack-knife' analysis. Because the post-coital test (PCT) was not assessed in one of the samples, a synthesis model including the PCT was based on two samples only. RESULTS: The ability of the synthesis models to distinguish between women who became pregnant and those who did not was comparable to the ability of the one-sample models when applied in the other samples. The reliability of the predictions by the three-sample synthesis model was somewhat better. Predictions improved considerably by including the PCT. CONCLUSIONS: The synthesis models performed better and had a broader empirical basis than the original models. They are therefore better suitable for application in other centres.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Practical Statistics for Medical Research
Altman, D. G. (1990) · doi:10.1201/9780429258589 · Cited by 10,668
Harrell, F. E. (2001) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3462-1 · Cited by 9,195
Practical Statistics for Medical Research.
Bartko, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (1992) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290246 · Cited by 4,797
Internal validation of predictive models
Steyerberg, E. W., Harrell, F. E., Borsboom, G. J. J. M., Eijkemans, M. J. C., Vergouwe, Y., & Habbema, J. D. F. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00341-9 · Cited by 2,746
Laboratory manual for the examination of human semen and semen-cervical mucus interaction.
Ma, B., Moghissi, K. S., ELIASSON, R., Ca, P., Aj, G., & Mr, P. (1980) · Cited by 2,209
Low and Very Low Birth Weight in Infants Conceived with Use of Assisted Reproductive Technology
Schieve, L. A., Meikle, S. F., Ferre, C., Peterson, H. B., Jeng, G., & Wilcox, L. S. (2002) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa010806 · Cited by 1,017
Regression with Missing X 's: A Review
Little, R. J. A. (1992) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1992.10476282 · Cited by 968
Steyerberg, E. W., Eijkemans, M. J. C., Harrell, F. E., & Habbema, J. D. F. (2001) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x0102100106 · Cited by 550
Neurological sequelae in children born after in-vitro fertilisation: a population-based study
Strömberg, B., Dahlquist, G., Ericson, A., Finnström, O., Köster, M., & Stjernqvist, K. (2002) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(02)07674-2 · Cited by 536
Delaying childbearing: effect of age on fecundity and outcome of pregnancy.
van Noord-Zaadstra, B. M., Looman, C. W., Alsbach, H., Habbema, J. D., te Velde, E. R., & Karbaat, J. (1991) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.302.6789.1361 · Cited by 446
Cited by
Assessing the Performance of Prediction Models: A Framework for Traditional and Novel Measures
Steyerberg, E. W., Vickers, A. J., Cook, N. R., Gerds, T., Gonen, M., Obuchowski, N., Pencina, M. J., & Kattan, M. W. (2010) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e3181c30fb2 · Cited by 5,170
A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome
Broekmans, F. J., Kwee, J., Hendriks, D. J., Mol, B. W., & Lambalk, C. B. (2006) · Human Reproduction Update · doi:10.1093/humupd/dml034 · Cited by 1,258
Prognosis and prognostic research: application and impact of prognostic models in clinical practice
Moons, K. G. M., Altman, D. G., Vergouwe, Y., & Royston, P. (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b606 · Cited by 934
Definition and prevalence of subfertility and infertility
Gnoth, C., Godehardt, E., Frank-Herrmann, P., Friol, K., Tigges, J., & Freundl, G. (2005) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/deh870 · Cited by 603
Obesity affects spontaneous pregnancy chances in subfertile, ovulatory women
van der Steeg, J. W., Steures, P., Eijkemans, M. J. C., Habbema, J. D. F., Hompes, P. G. A., Burggraaff, J. M., Oosterhuis, G. J. E., Bossuyt, P. M. M., van der Veen, F., & Mol, B. W. J. (2007) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/dem371 · Cited by 512
Metadata
- Authors
- Hunault, C. C.
- Venue
- Human Reproduction
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-06-24
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2019-2026
- ISSN
- 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2350
- OpenAlex
- W2098199441
- Cited by
- 288
- References
- 23
- FWCI
- 6.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Two new prediction rules for spontaneous pregnancy leading to live birth among subfertile couples, based on the synthesis of three previous models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/humrep/deh365
- The paper
- Hunault, C. C. (2004). Two new prediction rules for spontaneous pregnancy leading to live birth among subfertile couples, based on the synthesis of three previous models. Human Reproduction. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh365
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
