Retraction notice to ‘The impact of an endometrial receptivity array on personalizing embryo transfer for patients with infertility: a meta-analysis’ (F S Rev 2022;3:157-73)

of F&S Reviews.The Committee and Editor examined concerns related to the methodology used for the meta-analysis and determined that two flaws undermine the validity of the conclusions presented in the meta-analysis.(1) Three out of the four randomized controlled trials incorporated in the analysis were, in fact, the same single study at different stages, which resulted in the same patients being counted multiple times.This was verified by Dr. Ruiz, an author of these publications.(2) Cohort studies with different designs and comparisons were pooled inappropriately.The Journal regrets that these flaws were not detected during peer review.

Publication Details

Journal
F&S Reviews
Published
2024-10-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xfnr.2024.100080
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Reproductive Health and Technologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.54
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Retraction notice to ‘The impact of an endometrial receptivity array on personalizing embryo transfer for patients with infertility: a meta-analysis’ (F S Rev 2022;3:157-73)

1 citations
F&S Reviews
Reproductive Health and Technologies
0.54
article

Retraction notice to ‘The impact of an endometrial receptivity array on personalizing embryo transfer for patients with infertility: a meta-analysis’ (F S Rev 2022;3:157-73)

article en
1 citations

Abstract

of F&S Reviews.The Committee and Editor examined concerns related to the methodology used for the meta-analysis and determined that two flaws undermine the validity of the conclusions presented in the meta-analysis.(1) Three out of the four randomized controlled trials incorporated in the analysis were, in fact, the same single study at different stages, which resulted in the same patients being counted multiple times.This was verified by Dr. Ruiz, an author of these publications.(2) Cohort studies with different designs and comparisons were pooled inappropriately.The Journal regrets that these flaws were not detected during peer review.

F&S ReviewsVol. 6(1)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 26%
Reproductive Health and Technologies
0.54
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.