Cited by 173Reproductive Health and TechnologiesAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyReproductive Biology and Fertility

Female and male lifestyle habits and IVF: what is known and unknown

Klonoff-Cohen, H.·2005·Human Reproduction Update

Abstract

There is no greater tribute to the importance and efficacy of IVF than the fact that >1 x 10(6) babies have been born to infertile couples since its clinical introduction in 1978. Despite enormous advances regarding the technical aspects of the IVF procedure, the parents' contribution has virtually been ignored when considering aspects that influence success rates. This systematic review focuses on the effects of female and male lifestyle habits (specifically: smoking, alcohol and caffeine use, and psychological stress) on the reproductive endpoints of IVF (i.e. oocyte aspiration, fertilization, embryo transfer, achievement of a pregnancy, live birth delivery, and perinatal outcomes, e.g. low birthweight, multiple gestations). What is currently known in the field of lifestyle habits and IVF? There is compelling evidence that smoking has a negative influence on IVF outcomes, whereas for stress, the evidence is suggestive but insufficient due to the heterogeneity of studies. The evidence for the effects of alcohol and caffeine on IVF is inadequate, and therefore unknown, due to the scarcity of studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/humupd/dmh059

Cites

105 of 105 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Smoking reduces the success of fertility treatments such as IVF and ICSI.

    “Moreover, evidence shows that smoking reduces the success of fertility treatments such as IVF and ICSI (Klonoff-Cohen 2005, Mínguez-Alarcón 2018, Practice Committee 2018, Waylen 2008).”

    From Preconception lifestyle advice for people with infertility (2021) · cites this paper as Klonoff-Cohen 2005

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Klonoff-Cohen, H.
Affiliations
University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
Klonoff-Cohen, H.
Venue
Human Reproduction Update
Published
2005-03-01
Volume
11
Issue
2
Pages
180-204
ISSN
  • 1355-4786 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2369
OpenAlex
W2151606477
Cited by
173
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 12
FWCI
1.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Human Reproduction Update (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Biology and Fertility
Keywords
in vitro fertilization, lifestyle habits, smoking, alcohol consumption, caffeine consumption, psychological stress, IVF outcomes, oocyte aspiration, fertilisation (biology), embryo transfer, live birth, perinatal outcomes, low birth weight, multiple pregnancy, male infertility, female infertility
MeSH terms
Abortion, Spontaneous, Alcohol Drinking, Birth Weight, Caffeine, Embryo Transfer, Female, Fertilization in Vitro, Gestational Age, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Life Style, Male, Oocytes, Pregnancy, Pregnancy, Multiple, Smoking, Stress, Psychological, Multivariate Analysis, Sample Size, Pregnancy Rate

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