| Methods |
RCT, single‐centre, parallel design, randomisation: 1:1 |
| Participants |
160 patients scheduled for ICSI |
| Interventions |
Agonist group were treated with buserelin/hMG stimulation (long luteal protocol) while the antagonist group were treated with cetrorelix/hMG stimulation (flexible protocol). |
| Outcomes |
The treatment period
Number of hMG ampoules used
Number of abandoned cycles
Number of oocytes retrieved
Fertilization rate
Implantation rate
Clinical pregnancy rate
The occurrence of hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS)
The convenience and compliance of participants |
| Notes |
Number of participants at randomisation: 160 (cetrorelix: 80/buserelin: 80)
Number of participants at stimulation: 160 (cetrorelix: 80/buserelin: 80)
Number of participants at OPU: 142 (cetrorelix: 74/buserelin: 68) |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Reported as randomisation using opaque envelopes without any further details |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Opaque envelopes |
| Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes |
Low risk |
Blind |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes |
Unclear risk |
No missing outcomes data, LBR/OPR not addressed by the study |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
The study protocol was not available, but it is clear that the published reports included most expected outcomes |
| Other bias |
Low risk |
The study appears to be free from other sources of bias |
