Search

Reproductive failure due to age, genetics and disease necessitates innovative solutions. While reproductive tissue transplantation has advanced, ongoing research seeks superior approaches. Biomaterials, bioengineering and additive manufacturing, such as three-dimensional (3D) bioprinting, are harnessed to restore reproductive function. 3D bioprinting uses materials, cells and growth factors to mimic natural tissues, proving popular for tissue engineering, notably in complex scaffold creation with cell distribution. The versatility which is brought to reproductive medicine by 3D bioprinting allows more accurate and on-site applicability to various problems that are encountered in the field. However, in the literature, there is a lack of studies encompassing the valuable applications of 3D bioprinting in reproductive medicine. This systematic review aims to improve understanding, and focuses on applications in several branches of reproductive medicine. Advancements span the restoration of ovarian function, endometrial regeneration, vaginal reconstruction, and male germ cell bioengineering. 3D bioprinting holds untapped potential in reproductive medicine., (Copyright © 2024 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The prevalence of obesity has doubled among reproductive-age adults in the US over the past 40 years and is projected to impact half of the population by 2030. Obesity is associated with a twofold to threefold increase in infertility, largely because of anovulation, and is associated with a lower rate of pregnancy with ovulation induction among anovulatory women. As a result of these trends and associations, in vitro fertilization (IVF) care will need to be adapted to provide safe, effective, and equitable access for patients with obesity. Research over the past 10 years has demonstrated safe sedation practices and effective procedure modifications for oocyte retrievals and embryo transfers in patients with obesity undergoing IVF treatment. We encourage IVF medical directors to revisit body mass index restrictions for IVF treatment in favor of individualized patient risk assessments to minimize weight bias and provide timely access to safe and effective IVF care for patients with obesity and infertility., Competing Interests: Declaration of Interests C.E.B. has nothing to disclose. M.G. reports Secretary-elect, Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement. S.J.L. reports The University of Rochester Medical Center supported my time used to contribute to the manuscript. W.V. reports funding from the National Institute of Child and Health Development CONSORT Grant, Title of Project: Multi-center, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial of modified natural versus programmed cycles for frozen embryo transfers and their association with preeclampsia and live births (NatPro), May Health The Rebalance Study, Title of Project: A prospective, multicenter, randomized, pivotal study of the May Health System in transvaginal ablation of ovarian tissue under ultrasound guidance in women with infertility due to polycystic ovary syndrome; consulting fees from Turtle Health and Seimens Diagnostics; honoraria from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) postgraduate course., (Copyright © 2024 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Although much of the foundational basic scientific and clinical research was conducted in the United States, the first in vitro fertilization (IVF) birth occurred in the United Kingdom. Why? For centuries, all research surrounding the field of "reproduction" has elicited bipolar passionate responses by the American public, and the issue of "test tube babies" has been no different. The history of conception in the United States is defined by complex interrelationships among scientists, clinicians, and politically charged decisions by various branches of the US government. With a focus on research in the United States, this review summarizes the early scientific and clinical advances important to the development of IVF and then addresses the potential future developments in IVF. We also consider what future advances are possible in the United States given the current regulations, laws, and funding., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To identify changes in current practice patterns, salaries, and satisfaction by gender and by years in practice among board-certified reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) subspecialists in the United States., Design: Cross-sectional web-based survey including 37 questions conducted by the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility., Setting: Not applicable., Patient(s): None., Intervention(s): None., Main Outcome Measure(s): The primary outcome measures were total compensation and practice patterns compared by gender and the type of practice. The secondary outcomes included demographics, the number of in vitro fertilization cycles, surgeries performed, and the morale of survey respondents., Result(s): There were 370 respondents (48.4% women and 51.4% men). Compared with a similar survey conducted 6 years earlier, a 27% increase in the number of female respondents was observed in this survey. There was a marginally significant trend toward lower compensation for female than male REI subspecialists (17% lower, $472,807 vs. $571,969). The gap was seen for responders with ≥10 years' experience, which is also when there was the largest gap between private and academic practice (mean $820,997 vs, $391,600). Most (77%) felt positively about the current state of the reproductive endocrinology field, and >90% would choose the subspecialty again., Conclusion(s): There has been a substantial increase in the number of recent female REI subspecialists showing less disparity in compensation, and the gap appears to be closing. There is an increasing gap in compensation between private and academic practices with ≥5 years of experience. Reproductive endocrinology and infertility remains a high morale specialty., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Healthcare teams must be deliberately cultivated to reach their full potential. Shifting focus from individual performance to a team's collective competence allows for targeted and evidence-based interventions that support teamwork and improve patient outcomes. We reviewed essential concepts drawn from team science and explored the practical applications of teaming. Reproductive endocrinology and infertility healthcare providers play a pivotal role by teaching, modeling, and fostering teaming attitudes and behaviors. Through teaming, we can maximize our teams' ability to learn, innovate, compete with other teams, and thrive in today's healthcare environment., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To characterize the interventional clinical trials in infertility and to assess whether trial location or industry sponsorship was associated with trial noncompletion., Design: Retrospective review of trials registered with ClinicalTrials.gov., Setting: None., Patient(s): None., Intervention(s): None., Main Outcome Measure(s): Descriptive statistics characterizing the attributes of the clinical trials including intervention type, topic, population, completion status, size, location, sponsor, and results. The effects of the sponsor and trial location on trial noncompletion were assessed via logistic regression., Result(s): In total, 505 trials initiated between 2010 and 2020 were included in our analysis. Drug interventions were the most commonly studied (45%); ovarian stimulation trials accounted for 27% of the studies. Live birth was tracked as an outcome by 20% of the studies; 3% of the trials included mental health outcomes. Few trials (15%) enrolled male participants. Only 11% of the trials reported results, and 4% of the trials reported the race or ethnicity of the participants. Most trials (82%) were conducted outside the United States. Overall, 18% of the trials were not completed, most often because of lack of accrual (47%). United States trials had over twice the odds of noncompletion in univariate analysis (odds ratio = 2.48, 95% confidence interval = [1.47, 4.17]); however, this relationship lost significance after adjusting for potential confounders (odds ratio = 0.95, 95% confidence interval = [0.42, 2.14]). Trial sponsorship was not associated with trial noncompletion., Conclusion(s): Infertility trials predominantly investigated drug interventions, particularly ovarian stimulation. Live birth was an infrequent outcome despite its relevance to patients. Clinical trials should aim to address the unmet needs in fertility care and be inclusive of underserved populations affected by infertility., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has created havoc on the socio-economic aspect of the world. With billions of lives being affected by this wrecking pandemic, global fertility services were also not left untouched by its impact. The possibility of sexual transmission of SARS-CoV-2 virus, its impact on male and female fertility, pregnancy, its potential teratogenic effect, and handling of gametes in the clinical laboratories were major concerns among reproductive medicine specialists, which led down all the reproductive health services, including IUI, IVF/ICSI in most of the countries. Even the people did not intend to conceive during the pandemic crisis and were hesitant to avail such services. Discrete evidence regarding the pathophysiology of COVID-19 infection and its impact on the human reproductive system is not very clear. In this review article, we intend to incorporate all the evidence related to the COVID-19 infection and its impact on human reproduction available to date. It is our responsibility to provide rightful information and to keep our patients familiar with the existing lack of clear evidence. In this COVID-19 era, it is important that the fertility management be prioritized in sub-fertile couples with diminished fertility reserve and high-risk conditions, like malignancies, that may affect their long-term fertility prospects., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Society for the Study of Reproduction. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: To report the utilization, effectiveness, and safety of practices in assisted reproductive technology (ART) globally in 2013 and assess global trends over time., Design: Retrospective, cross-sectional survey on the utilization, effectiveness, and safety of ART procedures performed globally during 2013., Setting: Seventy-five countries and 2,639 ART clinics., Patient(s): Women and men undergoing ART procedures., Intervention(s): All ART., Main Outcome Measure(s): The ART cycles and outcomes on country-by-country, regional, and global levels. Aggregate country data were processed and analyzed based on methods developed by the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART)., Result(s): A total of 1,858,500 ART cycles were conducted for the treatment year 2013 across 2,639 clinics in 75 participating countries with a global participation rate of 73.6%. Reported and estimated data suggest 1,160,474 embryo transfers (ETs) were performed resulting in >344,317 babies. From 2012 to 2013, the number of reported aspiration and frozen ET cycles increased by 3% and 16.4%, respectively. The proportion of women aged >40 years undergoing nondonor ART increased from 25.2% in 2012 to 26.3% in 2013. As a percentage of nondonor aspiration cycles, intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was similar to results for 2012. The in vitro fertilization (IVF)/ICSI combined delivery rates per fresh aspiration and frozen ET cycles were 24.2% and 22.8%, respectively. In fresh nondonor cycles, single ET increased from 33.7% in 2012 to 36.5% in 2013, whereas the average number of transferred embryos was 1.81-again with wide country variation. The rate of twin deliveries after fresh nondonor transfers was 17.9%; the triplet rate was 0.7%. In frozen ET cycles performed in 2013, single ET was used in 57.6%, with an average of 1.49 embryos transferred and twin and triplet rates of 10.8% and 0.4%, respectively. The cumulative delivery rate per aspiration was 30.4%, similar to that in 2012. Perinatal mortality rate per 1,000 births was 22.2% after fresh IVF/ICSI and 16.8% after frozen ET. The data presented depended on the quality and completeness of the data submitted by individual countries. This report covers approximately two-thirds of world ART activity. Continued efforts to improve the quality and consistency of reporting ART data by registries are still needed., Conclusion(s): Reported ART cycles, effectiveness, and safety increased between 2012 and 2013 with adoption of a better method for estimating unreported cycles., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The goal of this Views and Reviews is to let colleagues and leaders well versed in the African American experience in reproductive medicine address the problems of racism affecting our trainees and patients and, more significantly, propose solutions. The areas in reproductive medicine that will be explored from the African American perspective include the pipeline of providers, health disparities, and access to infertility treatment., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The aim of this article is to gather 9 thought leaders and their team members to present their ideas about the future of in vitro fertilization and the andrology laboratory. Although we have seen much progress and innovation in the laboratory over the years, there is still much to come, and this article looks at what these leaders think will be important in the future development of technology and processes in the laboratory., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The goal of this Views and Interviews series was to bring together the thought leaders in the field and envision what the laboratory will look like in the future. This consensus piece strives to take the thoughts of those leaders and develop themes and concepts that will be significant in the laboratory in the coming years., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The in vitro fertilization and andrology laboratories are at the center of assisted reproductive technologies and the place where technicians and embryologists manipulate gametes and preimplantation-stage embryos with the goal of achieving the best embryo for transfer. Through the years, these laboratories have seen developments in technique, technology, and testing. The goal of this Views and Interviews series is to bring together the thought leaders in the field and envision what the laboratories will look like in the next 10 years., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: The emergence of the novel coronavirus infection that arose in Wuhan, China in December 2019 has resulted in an epidemic that has quickly expanded to become one of the most significant public health threats in recent times. The objective of this review is to summarize how this pandemic has affected the activity of a Reproductive Medicine Center, which established a series of measures in parallel with governments decisions and scientific societies., Recent Findings: The control measures adopted for restarting the healthcare activity should be equitable and inclusive. Moreover, this pandemic has implied changes in treatments and strategies to be alert regarding the daily changing information. Finally, for ensuring a safe practice both for patients and staff, it is important to detect asymptomatic patients, so Reproductive Medicine centers must take special care with screening and testing procedures., Summary: The pandemic has pushed up toward a new reality in terms of Assisted Reproductive treatments, where social distance and responsibility are protagonists. We face a new challenge of balancing between responding to the committed efforts of infertile couples to achieve pregnancy and safeguarding the health of the future parents and their children during this time of pandemic., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Growing evidence of successful outcomes achieved with the oocyte vitrification technique has greatly contributed to its application in the field of fertility preservation (FP). The population that can benefit from FP includes women at a risk of losing their ovarian function because of either iatrogenic causes or natural depletion of their ovarian reserve. Therefore, oncological patients and healthy women who wish to delay motherhood for various reasons-elective FP-are currently being offered this option. Satisfactory oocyte survival rates and clinical outcomes, including cumulative live birth rates, have been reported in recent years. These studies show that age at oocyte retrieval strongly affects reproductive prognosis after FP. Therefore, elective FP patients should be encouraged to decide before they reach the age of 35 years to significantly increase their chances of success. The effect of age has also been observed in patients with cancer and women diagnosed with endometriosis. The reproductive outcome after FP is worse in patients with cancer, but a direct association between the disease and reproductive outcome is yet to be proven. Young patients (≤35 years) with endometriosis who have undergone cystectomy before oocyte retrieval for FP have worse outcomes than nonoperated women in age-matched groups. In addition, the number of oocytes used per patient is closely related to success in all populations, with considerable improvement in the result with the addition of a few oocytes, especially in healthy young patients., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The term "social media" refers to computer-mediated technologies that enable individuals and communities to gather, communicate, network, and share information. These technologies represent useful tools for enabling individual providers and their clinics to broadcast content that educates, informs, advertises, and narrates content to a larger audience. There are multiple benefits to maintaining a presence on social media, either as an individual physician or as a clinic, but several pitfalls deserve consideration as well. This guidance document does not endorse any specific cloud-based platform or service, though some are mentioned for the purposes of illustration., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Demand for fertility preservation in women for oncologic, nononcologic, and personal reasons has increased dramatically. Meeting that demand is a major challenge, and we are rising to the challenge. Mature oocyte cryopreservation after ovarian stimulation and ovarian tissue cryopreservation are both methods endorsed by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (formerly The American Fertility Society), and numerous papers confirmed their efficacy. In girls and women with leukemia or cancers who are at a high risk of ovarian metastasis and who may not be eligible for ovarian tissue transplantation, restoration of fertility can only be achieved by in vitro methods. Male fertility preservation has also become a pressing issue and is extensively reviewed in the present journal issue., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

COVID-19 was officially declared a pandemic in March 2020. Since then, our understanding of its effects on pregnancy have evolved rapidly. Emerging surveillance data and large cohort studies suggest that pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of intensive care unit hospitalization, invasive ventilation, and death. Pregnancies complicated by SARS-CoV-2 infection are associated with increased likelihood of cesarean delivery and preterm birth. Intrauterine transmission occurs, but seems to be rare. Critical gaps remain, and rigorous high-quality data are needed to better ascertain pregnancy risks and to inform antenatal and obstetrical management., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has claimed the lives of over one million people worldwide, and has affected all aspects of healthcare worldwide, including the delivery of care to patients with fertility-related diagnoses. In the United States, the response of US fertility clinics to the COVID-19 pandemic was coordinated by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). ASRM acted quickly to develop guidelines for limiting fertility treatment and clinic consultations during the early days of the pandemic, and then safely restarting fertility treatment. A survey of patients with fertility-related diagnoses who presented for care during the first months of the pandemic revealed that a majority of patients who presented for care during the early months of the pandemic experienced delayed or cancelled treatment cycles. Patients with infertility subsequently reported a desire to resume fertility care, but emphasized the importance of their clinic having policies and procedures in place to limit the risk of infection.

Legal issues affect reproductive medical practice throughout the entire world. The breadth and depth of this interrelationship extend far beyond the scope of one series of articles in Views and Reviews. Given this limitation, we have chosen to present five topics, all different, but illustrative of key concepts that influence our practice of reproductive medicine. Our hope is that this "medical-legal sampler" will both inform and provoke thoughtful consideration of the ways we can best and most responsibly practice and serve our patients., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Cell-free DNAs (cfDNAs) are fragmented forms of DNA that are released into extracellular environments. Analyzing them, regarding either concentration or genetic/epigenetic status can provide helpful information about disorders, response to treatments, estimation of success rates, etc. Moreover, since they are presented in body fluids, evaluation of the aforementioned items would be achieved by less/non-invasive methods. In human reproduction field, it is required to have biomarkers for prediction of assisted reproduction techniques (ART) outcome, as well as some non-invasive procedures for genetic/epigenetic assessments. cfDNA is an appropriate candidate for providing the both approaches in ART. Recently, scientists attempted to investigate its application in distinct fields of reproductive medicine that resulted in discovering its applicability for biomarker and genetic/epigenetic analyses. However, due to some limitations, it has not reached to clinical administration yet. In this article, we have reviewed the current reported data with respect to advantages and limitations of cfDNA utilization in three fields of ART, reproduction of male and female, as well as in vitro developed embryos.

Purpose: We have been inquiring into the diffusion process of reproductive genetic services (RGS) and the viability of geneticization in human reproduction., Method: A 2-round modified-Delphi survey was applied amongst Israeli and Spanish experts to analyze regulatory attitudes and expectations about the future applications of RGS. We argue that an explanation of RGS diffusion based on a 'technology-push' impulse should be complemented by a 'demandpull' approach, which underscores the importance of regulatory frameworks and demand-inducing policies. The diffusion of RGS is advancing in a 'spiralshaped' process where technology acts as a cause and effect simultaneously, modulating social acceptance and redefining the notions of health and responsibility along the way., Results: We suggest that there is a 'grey-zone' of RGS regulations regarding four procedures: the use of germline genome modification (GGM) for severe monogenic disorders, preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for detection of chromosomal abnormalities, PGT for multifactorial diseases, and PGT with whole-exome screening., Conclusions: Although far from the geneticization of human reproduction, our findings suggest that, since techno-scientific imaginaries tend to shape regulations and thus favor the diffusion of RGS, policymakers should pay attention to those procedures by focusing on good practices and equity while providing sound information on potential risks and expected success rates. A broad and inclusive societal debate is critical for overcoming the difficulty of drawing a clear line between medical and non-medical uses of genetic selection and engineering while searching for the right balance between allowing reproductive autonomy and protecting the public interest.

Mechanistic understanding of germ cell formation at a genome-scale level can aid in developing novel therapeutic strategies for infertility. Germ cell formation is a complex process that is regulated by various mechanisms, including epigenetic regulation, germ cell-specific gene transcription, and meiosis. Gonads contain a limited number of germ cells at various stages of differentiation. Hence, genome-scale analysis of germ cells at the single-cell level is challenging. Conventional genome-scale approaches cannot delineate the landscape of genomic, transcriptomic, and epigenomic diversity or heterogeneity in the differentiating germ cells of gonads. Recent advances in single-cell genomic techniques along with single-cell isolation methods, such as microfluidics and fluorescence-activated cell sorting, have helped elucidate the mechanisms underlying germ cell development and reproductive disorders in humans. In this review, the history of single-cell transcriptomic analysis and their technical advantages over the conventional methods have been discussed. Additionally, recent applications of single-cell transcriptomic analysis for analyzing germ cells have been summarized.

The business of medicine continues to be an area of growing importance, particularly in reproductive medicine. We provide a synthesis of salient concepts within the spectrum of business in medicine. The topics we review include finances and accounting; business operations as related to human resources, information technology (telemedicine), organizational governance, and practice models; insurance billing and contract negotiations; and the impact of health care policy on reproductive medicine., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Study Question: Can a core outcome set to standardize outcome selection, collection, and reporting across future infertility research be developed?, Summary Answer: A minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, has been developed for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility., What Is Known Already: Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions, and the selective reporting of outcomes on the basis of statistical analysis, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret., Study Design, Size, Duration: A three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries)., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Healthcare professionals, researchers, and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods., Main Results and the Role of Chance: The core outcome set consists of: viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin, and higher multiple pregnancy); pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth, and termination of pregnancy); live birth; gestational age at delivery; birthweight; neonatal mortality; and major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: We used consensus development methods which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, Delphi survey attrition, and an arbitrary consensus threshold., Wider Implications of the Findings: Embedding the core outcome set within RCTs and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection, and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Ferility and Sterility, and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund, and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. Hans Evers reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. José Knijnenburg reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. Richard Legro reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. Ben Mol reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. Craig Niederberger reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. Annika Strandell reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. Ernest Ng reports research sponsorship from Merck. Lan Vuong reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form., Trial Registration Number: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative: 1023., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Despite years of recognition that many physicians are woefully unprepared to face challenges regarding the business of medicine, marginal progress has been made. In this piece, we aim to provide the contemporary reproductive medicine physician with an understanding of billing, coding, and, most importantly, cost containment for a typical fertility practice. It is critical for modern practices to not forego hard-earned revenue to insurance companies or not be aware of critical rules and regulations. While running a successful fertility practice requires good medical care, a profitable practice is necessary for overall long-term success. This article provides a brief history of medical insurance and billing, explains the process of updating billing codes, and reviews the revenue cycle, cost containment, and contract negotiations with insurance companies., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Question: Can the priorities for future research in infertility be identified?, Summary Answer: The top 10 research priorities for the four areas of male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction, and ethics, access, and organization of care for people with fertility problems were identified., What Is Known Already: Many fundamental questions regarding the prevention, management, and consequences of infertility remain unanswered. This is a barrier to improving the care received by those people with fertility problems., Study Design, Size, Duration: Potential research questions were collated from an initial international survey, a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines, and Cochrane systematic reviews. A rationalized list of confirmed research uncertainties was prioritized in an interim international survey. Prioritized research uncertainties were discussed during a consensus development meeting. Using a formal consensus development method, the modified nominal group technique, diverse stakeholders identified the top 10 research priorities for each of the categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction, and ethics, access, and organization of care., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems, and others (healthcare funders, healthcare providers, healthcare regulators, research funding bodies and researchers) were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance., Main Results and the Role of Chance: The initial survey was completed by 388 participants from 40 countries, and 423 potential research questions were submitted. Fourteen clinical practice guidelines and 162 Cochrane systematic reviews identified a further 236 potential research questions. A rationalized list of 231 confirmed research uncertainties were entered into an interim prioritization survey completed by 317 respondents from 43 countries. The top 10 research priorities for each of the four categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility (including age-related infertility, ovarian cysts, uterine cavity abnormalities, and tubal factor infertility), medically assisted reproduction (including ovarian stimulation, IUI, and IVF), and ethics, access, and organization of care, were identified during a consensus development meeting involving 41 participants from 11 countries. These research priorities were diverse and seek answers to questions regarding prevention, treatment, and the longer-term impact of infertility. They highlight the importance of pursuing research which has often been overlooked, including addressing the emotional and psychological impact of infertility, improving access to fertility treatment, particularly in lower resource settings, and securing appropriate regulation. Addressing these priorities will require diverse research methodologies, including laboratory-based science, qualitative and quantitative research, and population science., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, methodological decisions informed by professional judgement, and arbitrary consensus definitions., Wider Implications of the Findings: We anticipate that identified research priorities, developed to specifically highlight the most pressing clinical needs as perceived by healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems, and others, will help research funding organizations and researchers to develop their future research agenda., Study Funding/ Competing Interest(s): The study was funded by the Auckland Medical Research Foundation, Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Geoffrey Adamson reports research sponsorship from Abbott, personal fees from Abbott and LabCorp, a financial interest in Advanced Reproductive Care, committee membership of the FIGO Committee on Reproductive Medicine, International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, International Federation of Fertility Societies, and World Endometriosis Research Foundation, and research sponsorship of the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies from Abbott and Ferring. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. Hans Evers reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. Andrew Horne reports research sponsorship from the Chief Scientist's Office, Ferring, Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, and Wellbeing of Women and consultancy fees from Abbvie, Ferring, Nordic Pharma, and Roche Diagnostics. M. Louise Hull reports grants from Merck, grants from Myovant, grants from Bayer, outside the submitted work and ownership in Embrace Fertility, a private fertility company. Neil Johnson reports research sponsorship from Abb-Vie and Myovant Sciences and consultancy fees from Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor Pharma. José Knijnenburg reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. Richard Legro reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. Ben Mol reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. Ernest Ng reports research sponsorship from Merck. Craig Niederberger reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. Jane Stewart reports being employed by a National Health Service fertility clinic, consultancy fees from Merck for educational events, sponsorship to attend a fertility conference from Ferring, and being a clinical subeditor of Human Fertility. Annika Strandell reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. Jack Wilkinson reports being a statistical editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. Andy Vail reports that he is a Statistical Editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology & Fertility Review Group and of the journal Reproduction. His employing institution has received payment from HFEA for his advice on review of research evidence to inform their 'traffic light' system for infertility treatment 'add-ons'. Lan Vuong reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the present work. All authors have completed the disclosure form., Trial Registration Number: Not applicable., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Telemedicine had been very slowly making inroads into standard clinical practice. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the rapid implementation of telemedicine across most practices. The efficiency and permanence of telemedicine services depends on a multitude of factors including technologic choices, governmental and insurance regulations, reimbursement policies, and staff and patient education and acceptance. Although challenges remain and the extent of implementation is still evolving, it is clear that telemedicine is here to stay and that all those involved in health care need to be familiar with its opportunities and challenges., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To analyse the published literature in reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) to examine the transparency and the use of reproducible research practices of the scientific literature and to identify possible avenues for improvement., Design: Meta-epidemiologic study. We examined the first 20 consecutive full-text original articles presenting primary data from five REI-specific journals for 2013 and for 2018, and eligible REI articles published in 2013-2018 in five high-impact general journals. Eligible articles were required to be full-text original articles, presenting primary data., Setting: Not applicable., Patient(s): Not applicable., Intervention(s): Not applicable., Main Outcome Measure(s): Each article was assessed for study type, trial registration, protocol and raw data availability, funding and conflict of interest declarations, inclusion in subsequent systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, sample size, and whether the work claimed to be novel or replication. Sample sizes and citation counts also were obtained., Result(s): A total of 222 articles were deemed eligible; 98 from REI journals published in 2013, 90 from REI journals published in 2018, and 34 from high-impact journals. There were 37 studies registered, 15 contained a protocol, and two stated actively that they were willing to share data. Most studies provided a statement about funding and conflicts of interest. Two articles explicitly described themselves as replications. All randomized controlled trial published in REI journals were registered prospectively; many meta-analyses were not registered. High-impact journal articles had a greater median sample size and more citations and were more likely to be registered, to have a protocol, and to claim novelty explicitly when compared with REI 2013 and 2018 articles., Conclusion(s): Research in REI can be improved in prospective registration, routine availability of protocols, wider sharing of raw data whenever feasible, and more emphasis on replication., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of telemedicine internationally. The reproductive clinics that thrived in this tumultuous time had access to fully electronic medical records with user-friendly telehealth platforms and remote support staff for physicians. However, complete transition from in-person visits to telehealth uncovered many opportunities for innovation. At-home semen testing is not yet widely recognized, and patients still require an in-person visit for ultrasounds, procedures, and physical examinations. Although emergency policies and waivers have made it easier for providers to legally practice across state borders and receive payments from insurance companies, they vary from state to state and have not been cemented into law. Finally, clinical training for medical students, residents, and fellows has been affected by decreased clinical and surgical volume. However, trainees have also proven to be the most adaptable, quickly shifting to remote learning practices through social media, online surgical atlases, and wide distribution of "virtual visiting professor" lectures. As countries have eased physical distancing guidelines, patients ultimately benefit from having the option of a telehealth appointment. Although there is still much work to be done to improve telehealth, the COVID-19 pandemic has at least proven that it is a safe method of patient care and teaching., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The World Health Organization has declared the outbreak of the coronavirus disease COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, a pandemic. This novel infectious disease has rapidly become a global health threat. Currently, there are limited data on the extent of reproductive system damage caused by COVID-19. We reviewed the potential risks for complications in the reproductive system caused by COVID-19 infection. In addition, based on the latest American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), and European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), recommendations regarding clinical and patient management, we provide a series of suggestions for infection control measures in reproductive medicine departments. With the gradual restoration of reproductive care services, reproductive departments in epidemic areas should actively seek to minimize COVID-19 infection of both healthcare workers and patients.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused the rapid adoption of telemedicine in most medical practices. This series of articles address issues that are often not well considered, such as the types of technological platforms available, the effects of telemedicine on staffing, space requirements, and the financial impact of remote visits. In addition, the limits of telemedicine compared to in-office visits are discussed, as well as the effects on trainees and possibilities for the future., (Copyright © 2020 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)