Endometrial injury for pregnancy following sexual intercourse or intrauterine insemination
Information
- DOI:
- https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011424.pub2Copy DOI
- Database:
-
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Version published:
-
- 14 June 2016see what's new
- Type:
-
- Intervention
- Stage:
-
- Review
- Cochrane Editorial Group:
-
Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group
- Copyright:
-
- Copyright © 2016 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Article metrics
Altmetric:
Cited by:
Authors
Contributions of authors
SL conceived and developed the protocol with input and final approval from all authors.
SL and MM developed the search strategy, searched for trials and selected the included studies.
SL, MM and GT extracted data from the included studies.
SL and GT entered data into RevMan (RevMan 2014), and performed the analysis with guidance from WP and CN.
SL drafted the review in close collaboration with MM and GT.
All review authors helped to interpret the analyses. All review authors read and commented on the draft versions of the review, and approved the final version.
Sources of support
Internal sources
-
University of Auckland, New Zealand.
PhD Scholarship awarded to Sarah Lensen
-
University of Auckland Summer Research Scholarship, New Zealand.
Gabriella Templer was funded by The University of Auckland Summer Research Scholarships programme (Kate Edger Educational Charitable Trust) to enable her contribution to this review.
External sources
-
None, Other.
Declarations of interest
AG is an author of one of the included studies (Gibreel 2013) and has no other known conflicts of interest.
SL and CF are authors of two ongoing studies (ACTRN12614000657628; ACTRN12614000656639). SL has no other known conflicts of interest.
CF is a director/shareholder of a fertility/gynaecology clinic and undertakes private practice within those premises.
WPM has no known conflicts of interest.
CON has no known conflicts of interest.
GT has no known conflicts of interest.
MM has no known conflicts of interest.
AG has no known conflicts of interest.
When a review author was also the author of an included study, they were not involved in the process of appraising the study for inclusion, performing 'Risk of bias' assessments or data extraction.
Acknowledgements
We thank the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. In particular, we are grateful to Marian Showell (Information Specialist) for her assistance in developing the search strategies and Vanessa Jordan (New Zealand Cochrane Fellow) for her assistance with methodological aspects of the protocol and review.
We thank the authors of included studies for corresponding with us regarding questions pertaining to this review.
We acknowledge Waleed El‐Khayat for sourcing a copy of one of the included studies from a university library local to him (Al‐Tamemi 2014).
Version history
| Published | Title | Stage | Authors | Version |
| 2022 Oct 24 | Endometrial injury for pregnancy following sexual intercourse or intrauterine insemination | Review | Bich Ngoc Bui, Sarah F Lensen, Ahmed Gibreel, Wellington P Martins, Helen Torrance, Frank J Broekmans | |
| 2021 Mar 18 | Endometrial injury for pregnancy following sexual intercourse or intrauterine insemination | Review | Bich Ngoc Bui, Sarah F Lensen, Ahmed Gibreel, Wellington P Martins, Helen Torrance, Frank J Broekmans | |
| 2016 Jun 14 | Endometrial injury for pregnancy following sexual intercourse or intrauterine insemination | Review | Sarah F Lensen, Marlies Manders, Carolina O Nastri, Ahmed Gibreel, Wellington P Martins, Gabriella E Templer, Cindy Farquhar | |
| 2014 Dec 10 | Endometrial injury for pregnancy following sexual intercourse or intrauterine insemination | Protocol | Sarah F Lensen, Marlies Manders, Carolina O Nastri, Ahmed Gibreel, Wellington P Martins, Cindy Farquhar | |
Differences between protocol and review
We divided the domain of performance bias to more clearly convey the different risks by evaluating blinding of participants and of personnel separately.
Due to the high risk of bias associated with most of the included studies and subsequent low or very low quality of evidence, we conducted a sensitivity analysis excluding studies at high or unclear risk of bias for allocation concealment. We highlighted this analysis in the review to stress the concern around the low or very low quality of evidence, and we also included the analysis in the 'Summary of findings' table.
