In vitro fertilization outcomes and alcohol consumption in at-risk drinkers: the effects of a randomized intervention
Open accessAbstract
Background and Objectives: Women's use of alcohol in pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of fetal loss and birth defects. Also, alcohol use in women decreases the success of infertility treatment, such as in vitro fertilization (IVF). Our goal was to determine if there were differences in IVF outcomes and alcohol use parameters among at‐risk drinkers randomized to a brief intervention (BI) versus assessment only (AO). Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial to determine the effect of BI or AO among at‐risk drinkers on IVF. We studied 37 women (AO = 21; BI = 16). Results: While the BI group had a significantly greater decrease in the number of drinks/drinking day compared to the AO group (p = .04), there were no differences in the likelihood of implantation failure, chemical pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, preterm birth, or live birth. Conclusions: BI and AO contributed to a decrease in alcohol use and did not demonstrate differences in IVF outcomes. A larger study may confirm these preliminary findings. Scientific Significance: Our results will assist care providers in treating alcohol use in pregnancy in an effective way, such that IVF cycles and the chance of pregnancy are optimized. (Am J Addict 2013;22:481–485)
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
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.
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?
Seven studies met the inclusion criteria for this review, only three of which reported on live birth or ongoing pregnancy (Belan 2019, Mutsaerts 2016, Rossi 2013), and one provided data on live birth on request (Oostingh 2020).
“Seven studies met the inclusion criteria for this review, only three of which reported on live birth or ongoing pregnancy (Belan 2019, Mutsaerts 2016, Rossi 2013), and one provided data on live birth on request (Oostingh 2020).”
From Preconception lifestyle advice for people with infertility (2021) · cites this paper as Rossi 2013
In Rossi 2013, the decrease in number of weeks drinking above the safety daily limit in the past 6 months was greater in the experimental group than control, with a mean difference of 3.90 (95% CI -0.76 to 8.56).
“Decrease in number of weeks drinking above the safety daily limit in the past 6 months (mean ± SD) 5.6 ± 9 in experimental group (n = 16) 1.7 ± 3.5 in control group (n = 21) MD 3.90, 95% CI -0.76 to 8.56”
From Preconception lifestyle advice for people with infertility (2021) · cites this paper as Rossi 2013
In Rossi 2013, the decrease in number of drinks on a drinking day was greater in the experimental group than control, with a mean difference of 0.60 (95% CI -0.05 to 1.25).
“Rossi 2013 Decrease in number of drinks on a drinking day (mean ± SD) 1 ± 1 in experimental group (n = 16) 0.4 ± 1 in control group (n = 21) MD 0.60, 95% CI -0.05 to 1.25”
From Preconception lifestyle advice for people with infertility (2021) · cites this paper as Rossi 2013
In Rossi 2013, the decrease in number of binges in the past 6 months was greater in the experimental group than control, with a mean difference of 13.30 (95% CI -8.54 to 35.14).
“Decrease in number of binges in the past 6 months (mean ± SD) 14.5 ± 44.4 in experimental group (n = 16) 1.2 ± 4.5 in control group (n = 21) MD 13.30, 95% CI -8.54 to 35.14”
From Preconception lifestyle advice for people with infertility (2021) · cites this paper as Rossi 2013
In Rossi 2013, the decrease in percentage of drinking days in the past 6 months was greater in the experimental group than control, with a mean difference of 0.10 (95% CI -0.07 to 0.27).
“Decrease in % of drinking days in past 6 months (mean ± SD) 0.2 ± 0.3 in experimental group (n = 16) 0.1 ± 0.2 in control group (n = 21) MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.27”
From Preconception lifestyle advice for people with infertility (2021) · cites this paper as Rossi 2013
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 21 · Cited by 8
- Authors
- Rossi, B. V., Chang, G., Berry, K. F., Hornstein, M. D., & Missmer, S. A.
- Affiliations
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Harvard University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Rossi, Brooke V.
- Venue
- The American Journal on Addictions
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-04-05
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 481-485
- ISSN
- 1055-0496 (ISSN-L)
- 1521-0391
- PMC
- PMC3748391
- OpenAlex
- W1538830693
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 0.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- American Journal on Addictions (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA014678, K24 AA 00289, K24AA000289)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
- Keywords
- IVF outcomes, alcohol consumption, at-risk drinkers, brief intervention, alcohol use in pregnancy, infertility treatment, implantation failure, chemical pregnancy, miscarriage, preterm birth, live birth, alcoholism treatment
- MeSH terms
- Abortion, Spontaneous, Adult, Alcohol Drinking, Female, Fertilization in Vitro, Humans, Embryo Implantation, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Outcome, Psychotherapy, Brief, Risk Factors, Premature 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
