Back

Thermal Discomfort and In-vitro Fertilization Treatment Outcomes

Telagarapu, V. M.; Ravuri, S.; Veeramachaneni, P.; Bankura, S. R.; Kumar, N.

2026-05-24 obstetrics and gynecology
10.64898/2026.05.21.26353705 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Literature on the role of thermal discomfort (heat- and cold-stress) on in-vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes are scarce and inconclusive. This multi-center research examines association between heat stress and IVF treatment outcomes in Andhra Pradesh, which is prone to year around chronic heat stress. Methods: IVF data were abstracted from clinical chart review of all patients from three IVF from centers 2019 to 2023, which included time-stamped data on each IVF procedure, demographics and pre-existing comorbidities. Weather data were acquired from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). IVF outcomes were modelled with respect to time-lagged exposure to ambient temperature stratified by hyper- and hypo-thermic conditions using Poisson and logistic regressions depending on the scale of IVF outcomes adjusting for confounders. Results: Heat stress peaked in June, which corresponded with elevated number of spontaneous abortions/miscarriage (SAM). Under hypo- and hyper-thermic conditions a unit increase ambient temperature was associated with an 11% higher and an 8% lower number of oocytes retrieved, respectively. Adjusting for confounders, a 10 degree F increase in two-day lag heat stress was associated with a 30% higher odds of SAM (odds ratio ~ 1.03; 95% CI = 1.001 to 1.068; p-value < 0.043), and odds of PTB were 3 times higher when three day-lagged heat index (HI) was greater than 35 degree C (odds ratio 1.13 to 7.99; p < 0.05). Conclusion. Our findings warrant strategies to engage IVF patients in mitigating their exposure to thermal discomfort before and during the treatment.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.