↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Androgens (dehydroepiandrosterone or testosterone) for women undergoing assisted reproduction

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
92 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
191 Mendeley
Title
Androgens (dehydroepiandrosterone or testosterone) for women undergoing assisted reproduction
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009749.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helen E Nagels, Josephine R Rishworth, Charalampos S Siristatidis, Ben Kroon

Abstract

Infertility is a condition affecting 10% to 15% of couples of reproductive age. It is generally defined as "the failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy after 12 months or more of regular unprotected sexual intercourse". The treatment of infertility may involve manipulation of gametes or of the embryos themselves. These techniques are together known as assisted reproductive technology (ART). Practitioners are constantly seeking alternative or adjunct treatments, or both, in the hope that they may improve the outcome of assisted reproductive techniques. This Cochrane review focusses on the adjunct use of synthetic versions of two naturally-produced hormones, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and testosterone (T), in assisted reproduction.DHEA and its derivative testosterone are steroid hormones proposed to increase conception rates by positively affecting follicular response to gonadotrophin stimulation, leading to greater oocyte yields and, in turn, increased chance of pregnancy. To assess the effectiveness and safety of DHEA and testosterone as pre- or co-treatments in subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction. We searched the following electronic databases, trial registers and websites up to 12 March 2015: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, electronic trial registers for ongoing and registered trials, citation indexes, conference abstracts in the Web of Science, PubMed and OpenSIGLE. We also carried out handsearches. There were no language restrictions. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DHEA or testosterone as an adjunct treatment to any other active intervention, placebo, or no treatment in women undergoing assisted reproduction. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted relevant data and assessed them for risk of bias. We pooled studies using fixed-effect models. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for each dichotomous outcome. Analyses were stratified by type of treatment. There were no data for the intended groupings by dose, mode of delivery or after one/more than one cycle.We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for the main findings using the GRADE working group methods. We included 17 RCTs with a total of 1496 participants. Apart from two trials, the trial participants were women identified as 'poor responders' to standard IVF protocols. The included trials compared either testosterone or DHEA treatment with placebo or no treatment.When DHEA was compared with placebo or no treatment, pre-treatment with DHEA was associated with higher rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.71; eight RCTs, N = 878, I² statistic = 27%, moderate quality evidence). This suggests that in women with a 12% chance of live birth/ongoing pregnancy with placebo or no treatment, the live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate in women using DHEA will be between 15% and 26%. However, in a sensitivity analysis removing trials at high risk of performance bias, the effect size was reduced and no longer reached significance (OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.56; five RCTs, N = 306, I² statistic = 43%). There was no evidence of a difference in miscarriage rates (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.17; eight RCTs, N = 950, I² statistic = 0%, moderate quality evidence). Multiple pregnancy data were available for five trials, with one multiple pregnancy in the DHEA group of one trial (OR 3.23, 95% CI 0.13 to 81.01; five RCTs, N = 267, very low quality evidence).When testosterone was compared with placebo or no treatment we found that pre-treatment with testosterone was associated with higher live birth rates (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.30 to 5.20; four RCTs, N = 345, I² statistic = 0%, moderate evidence). This suggests that in women with an 8% chance of live birth with placebo or no treatment, the live birth rate in women using testosterone will be between 10% and 32%. On removal of studies at high risk of performance bias in a sensitivity analysis, the remaining study showed no evidence of a difference between the groups (OR 2.00, 95% CI 0.17 to 23.49; one RCT, N = 53). There was no evidence of a difference in miscarriage rates (OR 2.04, 95% CI 0.58 to 7.13; four RCTs, N = 345, I² = 0%, low quality evidence). Multiple pregnancy data were available for three trials, with four events in the testosterone group and one in the placebo/no treatment group (OR 3.09, 95% CI 0.48 to 19.98; three RCTs, N = 292, very low quality evidence).One study compared testosterone with estradiol and reported no evidence of a difference in live birth rates (OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.43 to 9.87; one RCT, N = 46, very low quality evidence) or miscarriage rates (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.11 to 4.64; one RCT, N = 46, very low quality evidence).The quality of the evidence was moderate, the main limitations being lack of blinding in the included trials, inadequate reporting of study methods, and low event and sample sizes in some trials. In women identified as poor responders undergoing ART, pre-treatment with DHEA or testosterone may be associated with improved live birth rates. The overall quality of the evidence is moderate. There is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions about the safety of either androgen. Definitive conclusions regarding the clinical role of either androgen awaits evidence from further well-designed studies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 191 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 191 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 14%
Researcher 26 14%
Other 19 10%
Student > Bachelor 16 8%
Other 42 22%
Unknown 28 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 74 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 9%
Psychology 11 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 4%
Computer Science 6 3%
Other 36 19%
Unknown 39 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 February 2021.
All research outputs
#4,357,345
of 17,786,057 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,640
of 11,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,074
of 375,936 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#154
of 211 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,786,057 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,761 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 375,936 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 211 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.