Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 485

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis

Broer, S. L., Dolleman, M., Opmeer, B. C., Fauser, B. C., Mol, B. W., Broekmans, F. J. M.·2011·Human Reproduction Update

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) is a marker of ovarian reserve status and represents a good predictor of ovarian response to ovarian hyperstimulation. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of AMH and antral follicle count (AFC) as predictors of an excessive response in IVF/ICSI treatment. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing literature was performed. Studies were included if 2 × 2 tables for the outcome excessive response in IVF patients in relation to AMH/AFC could be constructed. Using a bivariate meta-analytic model, both summary point estimates for sensitivity and specificity were calculated, as well as summary ROC curves. Clinical value was analysed by calculating post-test probabilities of excessive response at optimal cut-off levels, as well as the corresponding abnormal test rates. RESULTS: Nine studies reporting on AMH and five reporting on AFC were found. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity for AMH were 82 and 76%, respectively, and 82 and 80%, respectively, for AFC. Comparison of the summary estimates and ROC curves for AMH and AFC showed no statistical difference. Abnormal test rates for AMH and AFC amounted to ∼14 and 16%, respectively, at cut-off levels where test performance is optimal [likelihood ratio for a positive result (LR + ) > 8], with a post-test probability of ± 70%. CONCLUSIONS: Both AMH and AFC are accurate predictors of excessive response to ovarian hyperstimulation. Moreover, both tests appear to have clinical value. This opens ways to explore the potential of individualized FSH dose regimens based on ovarian reserve testing.

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 · 10.1093/humupd/dmq034

Cites

46 of 46 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

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

Show all 46 references

Cited by

See all 485

Metadata

Authors
Broer, S. L., Dolleman, M., Opmeer, B. C., Fauser, B. C., Mol, B. W., & Broekmans, F. J. M.
Venue
Human Reproduction Update
Published
2010-07-28
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
46-54
ISSN
  • 1355-4786 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2369
OpenAlex
W2099586602
Cited by
485
References
46
FWCI
4.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/humupd/dmq034
The paper
Broer, S. L., Dolleman, M., Opmeer, B. C., Fauser, B. C., Mol, B. W., & Broekmans, F. J. M. (2011). AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. Human Reproduction Update. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq034

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.