Figure 1 Flow chart showing the selection of publications identified in the literature search. From: GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF:

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

From: An open day in the metric space

Advertisements

Fig. 3. Plot of overall survival by adjuvant therapy for patient subgroups. (A) Patients with M0 disease (n = 411). (B) Patients receiving 36 Gy craniospinal.

Figure 1 WBC count (A), platelet count (B), MPV (C), platelet activation rate (D) and TGF-β1concentration (E) in the PF of women with endometriosis and.

The effectiveness of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist in poor ovarian responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Fig. 1 Flow chart of the COBRA-light trial and its extension study

From: Global Banking: Recent Developments and Insights from Research*

Figure 1. Flow diagram of participants recruited into the study.

Figure 2. Quality of life (QOL) scores for functional scale items

Fig. 1 Graphical representation

Figure 3. Day 2 cell symmetry

Figure 2. CONSORT flow diagram.

Fig. 3 Evolutionary game types as a function of relatedness and synergy where each plot is a different social group size. The payoffs used to generate.

Figure 1 Cumulative chance of pregnancy according to age at initiation of pregnancy seeking. The curves were drawn based on the following assumptions:

Source:Ellerman, Convery, and de Perthuis (2010). Figure 6. 2, p

pSS: primary SS; Scl: scleroderma.

Figure 1. Selection of papers.

Fig. 1 Flow chart of study selection

Figure 1. Conceptual model of well-being related to involvement in theatre. From: Theatre Involvement and Well-Being, Age Differences, and Lessons From.

Figure 1. Orthodontic set-up and location of LLLT or placebo-laser

Fig. 1 Flow of ascertainment of cases with incident childhood IgA vasculitis reported by four sources From: Incidence of IgA vasculitis in children estimated.

Figure 2. (A) Sézary syndrome patient before treatment

Fig 1 Respiratory support escalation strategies for study patients

From: Where do we go from here

Example 14. Schubert, Quartet in G Major, D

FIGURE 1: The flow chart of the systematic review: paper retrieval and selection. From: Pregnancy in dialysis patients in the new millennium: a systematic.

Figure 1. Single-Tree Model and BART Fits to Simulated Data.

Fig. 1 Selection of patients

Figure 1 Study flowchart.

Fig. 1 Flow diagram of patient selection and study design.

Figure 1. Academic productivity and high academic income: top earners vs. the rest of academics. The average number of ‘peer-reviewed article equivalents’

Figure 1 Flow chart of search and selection strategy for studies in a systematic review of endometrial thickness during IUI with ovarian stimulation. *

Figure 1. Orthodontic set-up and location of LLLT or placebo-laser

Figure 1 Flow of data processing

From: Estimating the Location of World Wheat Price Discovery

Figure 1. Publication channels used by scholars at the faculty of Arts, 2006–2013. From: Accountability in context: effects of research evaluation systems.

Figure 1: Time points at which sperm samples were analysed for aneuploidy frequencies in controls and cancer patients From: Sperm aneuploidy frequencies.

Figure 1: Logistic regression showing association of prescribing provider and patient panel characteristics with occurrence of a hospitalization or ED.

Figure 3. Visualisation of ESMO-MCB scores for curative and non-curative setting. A & B and 5 and 4 represent the grades with substantial improvement.

Figure 1. Dosage and administration route of drugs used in the BMD study. Each cycle was proposed every 28 days (‘base’ schedule) or 35 days (‘weekly’

Figure 1 Study flow chart

Figure 1 Flowchart for the study population.

From: Consumer Bankruptcy, Bank Mergers, and Information *

Figure 2 Comparison of pregnancy outcomes between true NC-FET and modified NC-FET. Odds ratio (OR) adjusted for clinical pregnancy (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.73–1.12)

Figure 1 PRISMA flow diagram illustrating the process of selection of studies for inclusion in the systematic review. From: How effective are weight-loss.

Figure 1. Scattergram of serum CA-125 levels in 775 consecutive patients who had been diagnosed with gynecologic disease by laparotomy or laparoscopy.

Figure 6. RRs for clinical cure rates stratified by different diseases

Figure 1. Progression-free survival and overall survival for FL/DLBCL patients. From: Clinicobiological features and prognostic impact of diffuse large.

Reproductive BioMedicine Online

Ovarian stimulation protocols for IVF: is more better than less?

Figure 1 Flow diagram detailing the systematic review process.

Jyotsna Pundir, Sesh Kamal Sunkara, Tarek El-Toukhy, Yacoub Khalaf

Figure 1 A dot plot illustrating the correlation between the yearly absolute risk difference for both MACE and major ... Figure 1 A dot plot illustrating.

Take home figure The protective role of CNP/NPR-B/NPRC.

The effectiveness of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist in poor ovarian responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Fig. 1 Flow chart of included patients for analyses

Fig. 1 Flow chart for selection of study subjects

Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

Figure 1. Flow diagram for selection of articles for systematic review. Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content.

Figure 1. Percentage of Pacific and European children completing all components of B4SC in 2013 and 2015 Figure 1. Percentage of Pacific and European.

Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

Fig. 1 Kaplan-Meier plot presenting no difference in progression to RA in patients with clinically suspect ... Fig. 1 Kaplan-Meier plot presenting no difference.

Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

Figure 1 Patient selection

Figure 1 Grant agencies and charitable foundations supporting Plan S.

Cost-effectiveness comparison between pituitary down-regulation with a gonadotropin- releasing hormone agonist short regimen on alternate days and an antagonist.

Figure 1: Trade shares of South Korea's major trading partners (% of South Korea's total trade in goods) Figure 1: Trade shares of South Korea's major.

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome prevention by gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist triggering of final oocyte maturation in a gonadotropin-releasing.

Figure 1 ABCDE of primary prevention.2

Figure 1. Forest plot of lung cancer mortality in LDCT trials.

Presentation transcript:

Figure 1 Flow chart showing the selection of publications identified in the literature search. From: GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23(5):560-579. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmx017 Hum Reprod Update | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

Figure 3 Ongoing pregnancy rate per patient population. From: GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23(5):560-579. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmx017 Hum Reprod Update | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

Figure 2 Funnel plot of publications that reported ongoing pregnancy rate. From: GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23(5):560-579. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmx017 Hum Reprod Update | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

Figure 4 Ongoing pregnancy rate per antagonist per flexible or fixed protocol with or without oral hormonal programming (OHP) in a general IVF population. From: GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23(5):560-579. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmx017 Hum Reprod Update | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

Figure 5 Clinical pregnancy rate per patient population. From: GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23(5):560-579. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmx017 Hum Reprod Update | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

Figure 6 Number of oocytes retrieved per patient population. From: GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23(5):560-579. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmx017 Hum Reprod Update | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

Figure 7 Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate per patient population. From: GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23(5):560-579. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmx017 Hum Reprod Update | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

Figure 8 Live birth rates per patient population. From: GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23(5):560-579. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmx017 Hum Reprod Update | © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com