Summary of findings for the main comparison. Acupuncture around the time of oocyte retrieval versus control (sham, placebo, no acupuncture) for women undergoing ART.
| Acupuncture around the time of oocyte retrieval versus control (sham, placebo, no acupuncture) for women undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) | ||||||
| Population: women undergoing ART Intervention: Acupuncture around the time of oocyte retrieval versus control (sham, placebo, no acupuncture) | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| Control | Acupuncture around the time of oocyte retrieval versus control (sham, placebo, no acupuncture) | |||||
| Live birth rate | 357 per 1000 | 326 per 1000 (247 to 418) | OR 0.87 (0.59 to 1.29) | 464 (2 studies) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1,2 | No significant difference in live birth rate was found between the two groups |
| *The basis for the assumed risk is 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; 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 Neither study clearly reported method of random sequence generation, one did not clearly describe method of allocation concealment 2 Only two studies (n=464), wide confidence intervals.