Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 351

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assisted Reproductive Technology and Pregnancy Outcome

Shevell, Tracy, Malone, Fergal D., Vidaver, John, Porter, T Flint, Luthy, David A., Comstock, Christine H., Hankins, Gary D., Eddleman, Keith, Dolan, Siobhan, Dugoff, Lorraine, Craigo, Sabrina, Timor, Ilan E., Carr, Stephen R., Wolfe, Honor M., Bianchi, Diana W., D’Alton, Mary E.·2005·Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of assisted reproductive technology (ART) is associated with an increase in chromosomal abnormalities, fetal malformations, or adverse pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: A prospective database from a large multicenter investigation of singleton pregnancies, the First And Second Trimester Evaluation of Risk trial, was examined. Subjects were divided into 3 groups: no ART use, use of ovulation induction (with or without intrauterine insemination), and use of in vitro fertilization (IVF). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to assess association between ART and adverse pregnancy outcomes (significance of differences was accepted at P < .05). RESULTS: A total of 36,062 pregnancies were analyzed: 34,286 (95.1%) were spontaneously conceived, 1,222 (3.4%) used ovulation induction, and 554 (1.5%) used IVF. There was no association between ART and fetal growth restriction, aneuploidy, or fetal anomalies after adjustment for age, race, marital status, years of education, prior preterm delivery, prior fetal anomaly, body mass index, smoking history, and bleeding in the current pregnancy. Ovulation induction was associated with a statistically significant increase in placental abruption, fetal loss after 24 weeks, and gestational diabetes after adjustment. Use of IVF was associated with a statistically significant increase in preeclampsia, gestational hypertension, placental abruption, placenta previa, and risk of cesarean delivery. CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo IVF are at increased risk for several adverse pregnancy outcomes. Although many of these risks are not seen in patients undergoing ovulation induction, several adverse pregnancy outcomes are still increased in this group. There was no increased incidence of fetal chromosomal or structural abnormalities in the women who used any type of ART compared with the women who conceived spontaneously. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II-2.

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 · 10.1097/01.aog.0000183593.24583.7c

Cites

20 of 20 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 20 references

Cited by

See all 351

Metadata

Authors
Shevell, T., Malone, F. D., Vidaver, J., Porter, T. F., Luthy, D. A., Comstock, C. H., Hankins, G. D., Eddleman, K., Dolan, S., Dugoff, L., Craigo, S., Timor, I. E., Carr, S. R., Wolfe, H. M., Bianchi, D. W., & D’Alton, M. E.
Venue
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Published
2005-11
Volume
106
Issue
5, Part 1
Pages
1039-1045
ISSN
0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2109896183
Cited by
351
References
20
FWCI
11.10
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: Assisted Reproductive Technology and Pregnancy Outcome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.aog.0000183593.24583.7c
The paper
Shevell, T., Malone, F. D., Vidaver, J., Porter, T. F., Luthy, D. A., Comstock, C. H., Hankins, G. D., Eddleman, K., Dolan, S., Dugoff, L., Craigo, S., Timor, I. E., Carr, S. R., Wolfe, H. M., Bianchi, D. W., & D’Alton, M. E. (2005). Assisted Reproductive Technology and Pregnancy Outcome. Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aog.0000183593.24583.7c

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.