Skip to main content
. 2021 Apr 14;2021(4):CD008605. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008605.pub4

Summary of findings 3. Dopamine agonist versus other active intervention.

Dopamine agonist vs other active intervention
Patient or population: women of reproductive age undergoing any ART therapy
Settings: ART unit
Intervention: dopamine agonist
Comparison: other active intervention
Outcomes Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) Relative effect
(95% CI) No of participants
(studies) Quality of the evidence
(GRADE) Comments
Risk with other active intervention Risk with dopamine agonist
Incidence of moderate or severe OHSS Cabergoline vs human albumin 432 per 1000 138 per 1000
(84 to 225)
OR 0.21
(0.12 to 0.38)
296
(3 RCTs) ⊕⊝⊝⊝
Verylowa,b,c
Cabergoline vs prednisolone 93 per 1000 27 per 1000
(5 to 120)
OR 0.27
(0.05 to 1.33)
150
(1 RCT) ⊕⊝⊝⊝
Verylowa,b,d
Cabergoline vs hydroxyethyl starch 67 per 1000 161 per 1000
(33 to 519)
OR 2.69
(0.48 to 15.10)
61
(1 RCT) ⊕⊝⊝⊝
Verylowa,b,d
Cabergoline vs coasting 125 per 1000 57 per 1000
(25 to 119)
OR 0.42
(0.18 to 0.95)
320
(3 RCTs) ⊕⊝⊝⊝
Verylowa,b,c
Cabergoline vs calcium infusion 60 per 1000 105 per 1000
(53 to 196)
OR 1.83
(0.88 to 3.81)
400
(2 RCTs) ⊕⊝⊝⊝
Very lowa,b,c
Cabergoline vs diosmin 120 per 1000 280 per 1000
(155 to 450)
OR 2.85
(1.35 to 6.00)
200
(1 RCT) ⊕⊝⊝⊝
Verylowa,b,d
Live birth rate Cabergoline vs coasting or calcium infusion 395 per 1000 414 per 1000
(323 to 510)
OR 1.08
(0.73 to 1.59)
430
(2 RCTs) ⊕⊕⊝⊝
Lowa,b
Clinical pregnancy rate Cabergoline vs human albumin, coasting, calcium infusion, or diosmin 432 per 1000 442 per 1000
(381 to 503)
OR 1.04
(0.81 to 1.33)
1060
(7 RCTs) ⊕⊕⊕⊝
Moderatea
Multiple pregnancy rate Cabergoline vs human albumin, coasting, or diosmin 130 per 1000 115 per 1000
(66 to 192)
OR 0.87
(0.47 to 1.59)
400
(3 RCTs) ⊕⊕⊝⊝
Lowa,b
Miscarriage rate Cabergoline vs human albumin, coasting, calcium infusion, or diosmin 79 per 1000 54 per 1000
(29 to 97)
OR 0.66
(0.35 to 1.25)
630
(4 RCTs) ⊕⊕⊝⊝
Lowa,b
Any other adverse events Cabergoline vs calcium infusion 0 per 1000 0 per 1000
(0 to 0)
Not estimable 170
(1 RCT)
Not estimable
*The risk in the intervention group (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).
ART: assisted reproductive technology; CI: confidence interval; OHSS: ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome; OR: odds ratio; RCT: randomised controlled trial.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidenceHigh quality: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect.
Moderate quality: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different.
Low quality: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect.
Very low quality: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.

aDowngraded one level for risk of bias associated with poor reporting of study methods.
bDowngraded one level for serious imprecision; total number of events fewer than 400.
cDowngraded one level for serious inconsistency; I² greater than 50.
dDowngraded one level for serious indirectness; single small study.