Summary of findings 5. IVF compared to IUI in natural cycles for male subfertility.
| IVF compared to IUI in natural cycles for male subfertility | ||||||
| Patient or population: couples with male subfertility Settings: single centre (the Netherlands) Intervention: IVF Comparison: IUI in natural cycles | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of couples (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| IUI in natural cycles | IVF | |||||
| Live birth rate per couple (all cycles) Follow‐up: 6 months | 407 per 1000 | 346 per 1000 (147 to 618) | OR 0.77 (0.25 to 2.35) | 53 (1 study) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1 | ‐ |
| OHSS | Not reported in any included studies | ‐ | ‐ | |||
| *The basis for the assumed risk was the median control group risk across studies. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; IUI: intra‐uterine insemination; IVF: in vitro fertilisation; OHSS: ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome; OR: odds ratio. | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. | ||||||
1 There was very serious imprecision, with small sample sizes.