Research library
All 421 studies
Filia doesn't ask you to take its word for anything. Every reference range, pattern flag, and safety note traces back to published research you can inspect here.
Browse by topic
Every study below belongs to one of these 42 topics. Each opens the papers for that question on their own, with what each one found.
Every study
Showing 1–20 of 421
NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2025 · retrospective cohort
Natural procreative technology (NaProTechnology) for infertility: take-home baby rate and clinical outcomes in a 5-year single-center cohort of 1,310 couples
Espinel-Bermudez MC et al. · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Crude take-home baby rate of 35.3%, adjusted cumulative rate of 62.1% over ~11 months. Success by age: 83.7% (18-30), 53.3% (36-40), 24.4% (40+). Largest real-world NaPro cohort to date.
Read the paper ↗NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2008 · cohort
Outcomes from treatment of infertility with natural procreative technology in an Irish general practice
Stanford JB, Parnell TA, Boyle PC · Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
In 1,072 Irish couples (mean infertility duration 5.6 years, 33% prior ART), crude live birth rate was 25.5%, adjusted (life-table) rate was 52.8% after up to 2 years of NaPro treatment. Comparable to ART cohort studies.
Read the paper ↗NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2012 · cohort
Natural procreative technology for infertility and recurrent miscarriage outcomes in a Canadian family practice
Tham E, Schliep K, Stanford JB · Canadian Family Physician
Cumulative adjusted live birth rate of 66% (crude 38%) in a Canadian family practice setting. 24% conceived with CrMS instruction alone, 69% with added NaPro medical treatment, 8% after surgery. All births were singletons.
Read the paper ↗NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2022 · review
How NaProTechnology compares with Assisted Reproductive Technology
Various · Medicina y Etica (Scielo)
Comparative review finding NaPro and ART represent different paradigms with different evaluations and treatments. NaPro success rates reflect natural conception without the multi-fetal pregnancy risks of ART.
Read the paper ↗NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2018 · case series
Healthy singleton pregnancies from restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) after failed IVF
Stanford JB et al. · Linacre Quarterly
Women who had previously failed IVF were able to achieve healthy singleton pregnancies through RRM approaches, demonstrating that RRM can succeed even after ART failure.
Read the paper ↗NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2021 · observational cohort
Restorative reproductive medicine for infertility in two family medicine clinics in New England: an observational study
Strawn E et al. · BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
RRM treatment in family medicine settings achieved live birth rates comparable to prior NaPro studies. Birth outcomes: 92% delivered at 37+ weeks, average birth weight 3374g, only 1.4% twins.
Read the paper ↗NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2025 · systematic review
The effectiveness and safety of restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) compared to assisted reproductive technology or medically unassisted conception: a systematic review
Ganci D et al. · Fertility and Sterility
No RCTs or comparative observational studies comparing RRM to ART were identified. Called for large-scale prospective studies. Noted that existing RRM cohort studies show crude live birth rates of 25.5-38% and adjusted rates of 52.8-66%.
Read the paper ↗NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2025 · review
Revitalizing reproductive health: innovations and future frontiers in restorative medicine
Bulletti FM et al. · Journal of Endometriosis and Pelvic Pain Disorders
Comprehensive review of RRM innovations including targeted hormonal therapies, surgical approaches to endometriosis, and integration of cycle-based diagnostics. Identifies promising future directions.
Read the paper ↗NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2017 · prospective cohort
Enrollments, childbearing motivations, and intentions of couples in the Creighton Model Effectiveness, Intentions, and Behaviors Assessment (CEIBA) Study
Fehring RJ et al. · Linacre Quarterly
Prospective study of 296 couples across 17 CrMS centers. Cumulative 13-cycle pregnancy rate with intention to conceive: 88-89.8%. Mucus-based identification of the fertile window proved highly effective.
Read the paper ↗NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2025 · prospective cohort
Pregnancies, intentions, and fertility behaviors during use of the Creighton Model FertilityCare System
Fehring RJ et al. · Frontiers in Medicine
Updated CEIBA results showing fertility behaviors and pregnancy outcomes during CrMS use. Real-world data on how couples use mucus charting to time intercourse for conception.
Read the paper ↗NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2022 · prospective cohort (methods paper)
International Natural Procreative Technology Evaluation and Surveillance of Treatment for Subfertility (iNEST): enrollment and methods
Stanford JB et al. · Human Reproduction Open
Multicenter prospective study across 10 clinics in 4 countries (2006-2016). Among all couples, 57% had at least one pregnancy and 44% at least one live birth. First large-scale prospective NaPro study.
Read the paper ↗NaProTechnology Outcomes · 2013 · clinical commentary
NaProTECHNOLOGY and Conscientious OB/GYN Medicine
Hilgers TW · Journal of Ethics, American Medical Association
Published in AMA Journal of Ethics, describes NaProTechnology as a systematic medical approach to infertility that identifies and treats underlying causes while respecting natural reproductive processes.
Read the paper ↗Progesterone & Luteal Phase · 2025 · RCT
Progesterone Luteal Support in Natural Cycles for Unexplained Infertility: A Randomized Controlled Trial (The PiNC Trial)
Sunkara SK et al. · PMC / Reproductive Sciences
Trial unable to demonstrate a significant increase in live birth rates with exogenous luteal phase progesterone supplementation vs no treatment in couples with unexplained infertility. No significant differences in biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, or miscarriage.
Read the paper ↗Progesterone & Luteal Phase · 2015 · review
Progesterone administration for luteal phase deficiency in human reproduction: an old or new issue?
Tavaniotou A et al. · Journal of Ovarian Research
No RCTs investigating progesterone supplementation specifically for LPD exist; reproducible diagnostic tests for LPD are lacking. Scientific debate remains open on protocols, routes, dosing, and timing.
Read the paper ↗Progesterone & Luteal Phase · 2021 · guideline
Diagnosis and treatment of luteal phase deficiency: a committee opinion (2021)
ASRM Practice Committee · Fertility and Sterility (ASRM)
ASRM committee opinion on LPD diagnosis and treatment. Acknowledges diagnostic challenges but recognizes that inadequate luteal function can impair fertility and pregnancy maintenance.
Read the paper ↗Progesterone & Luteal Phase · 2022 · systematic review / meta-analysis
The effect of progesterone supplementation for luteal phase support in natural cycle frozen embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials
Wang Y et al. · Fertility and Sterility
Progesterone supplementation in natural cycle FET increased live birth rate in some analyzes. LPD in natural cycles is considered rare but may affect outcomes when present.
Read the paper ↗Progesterone & Luteal Phase · 2004 · cohort
Mid-luteal serum progesterone and estradiol levels as predictors of pregnancy in IVF-ET cycles
Various · Fertility and Sterility
Mid-luteal progesterone >15 ng/mL increased odds of pregnancy 3.2-fold. Progesterone and estradiol levels were significantly higher in pregnant vs non-pregnant patients.
Read the paper ↗Progesterone & Luteal Phase · 2013 · cohort
The role of midluteal progesterone for the prediction of pregnancy after ovulation induction with clomiphene citrate for unexplained infertility
Various · Fertility and Sterility
Mid-luteal progesterone >22.5 ng/mL had 67.8% positive predictive value for pregnancy; values below had 81.2% negative predictive value. Demonstrates progesterone as a predictive marker.
Read the paper ↗Progesterone & Luteal Phase · 2023 · cohort
Does mid-luteal progesterone predict pregnancy in intrauterine insemination cycles following sequential clomiphene citrate and gonadotropin treatment?
Various · Medicine
Mid-luteal progesterone did not predict pregnancy in IUI cycles with combined CC+gonadotropin stimulation. Context matters: predictive value depends on the specific treatment protocol.
Read the paper ↗Progesterone & Luteal Phase · 2016 · systematic review / meta-analysis
Progesterone vs. synthetic progestins and the risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Asi N et al. · Systematic Reviews
Natural (bioidentical) progesterone was not associated with increased breast cancer risk, while synthetic progestins (especially MPA) showed elevated risk. Supports preference for bioidentical progesterone.
Read the paper ↗