Search

STUDY QUESTION Does a purpose-designed Decision Aid for women considering elective egg freezing (EEF) impact decisional conflict and other decision-related outcomes? SUMMARY ANSWER The Decision Aid reduces decisional conflict, prepares women for decision-making, and does not cause distress. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN Elective egg-freezing decisions are complex, with 78% of women reporting high decisional conflict. Decision Aids are used to support complex health decisions. We developed an online Decision Aid for women considering EEF and demonstrated that it was acceptable and useful in Phase 1 testing. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A single-blind, two-arm parallel group randomized controlled trial was carried out. Target sample size was 286 participants. Randomization was 1:1 to the control (existing website information) or intervention (Decision Aid plus existing website information) group and stratified by Australian state/territory and prior IVF specialist consultation. Participants were recruited between September 2020 and March 2021 with outcomes recorded over 12 months. Data were collected using online surveys and data collection was completed in March 2022. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Females aged ≥18 years, living in Australia, considering EEF, proficient in English, and with internet access were recruited using multiple methods including social media posts, Google advertising, newsletter/noticeboard posts, and fertility clinic promotion. After completing the baseline survey, participants were emailed their allocated website link(s). Follow-up surveys were sent at 6 and 12 months. Primary outcome was decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale). Other outcomes included distress (Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale), knowledge about egg freezing and female age-related infertility (study-specific measure), whether a decision was made, preparedness to decide about egg freezing (Preparation for Decision-Making Scale), informed choice (Multi-Dimensional Measure of Informed Choice), and decision regret (Decision Regret Scale). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Overall, 306 participants (mean age 30 years; SD: 5.2) were randomized (intervention n = 150, control n = 156). Decisional Conflict Scale scores were significantly lower at 12 months (mean score difference: −6.99 [95% CI: −12.96, −1.02], P  = 0.022) for the intervention versus control group after adjusting for baseline decisional conflict. At 6 months, the intervention group felt significantly more prepared to decide about EEF than the control (mean score difference: 9.22 [95% CI: 2.35, 16.08], P  = 0.009). At 12 months, no group differences were observed in distress (mean score difference: 0.61 [95% CI: −3.72, 4.93], P  = 0.783), knowledge (mean score difference: 0.23 [95% CI: −0.21, 0.66], P  = 0.309), or whether a decision was made (relative risk: 1.21 [95% CI: 0.90, 1.64], P  = 0.212). No group differences were found in informed choice (relative risk: 1.00 [95% CI: 0.81, 1.25], P  = 0.983) or decision regret (median score difference: −5.00 [95% CI: −15.30, 5.30], P  = 0.337) amongst participants who had decided about EEF by 12 months (intervention n = 48, control n = 45). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Unknown participant uptake and potential sampling bias due to the recruitment methods used and restrictions caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Some outcomes had small sample sizes limiting the inferences made. The use of study-specific or adapted validated measures may impact the reliability of some results. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS This is the first randomized controlled trial to evaluate a Decision Aid for EEF. The Decision Aid reduced decisional conflict and improved women's preparation for decision making. The tool will be made publicly available and can be tailored for international use. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The Decision Aid was developed with funding from the Royal Women's Hospital Foundation and McBain Family Trust. The study was funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Project Grant APP1163202, awarded to M. Hickey, M. Peate, R.J. Norman, and R. Hart (2019–2021). S.S. M.P. D.K. and S.B. were supported by the NHMRC Project Grant APP1163202 to perform this work. R.H. is Medical Director of Fertility Specialists of Western Australia and National Medical Director of City Fertility. He has received grants from MSD, Merck-Serono, and Ferring Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this study and is a shareholder of CHA-SMG. R.L. is Director of Women's Health Melbourne (Medical Practice), ANZSREI Executive Secretary (Honorary), RANZCOG CREI Subspecialty Committee Member (Honorary), and a Fertility Specialist at Life Fertility Clinic Melbourne and Royal Women's Hospital Public Fertility Service. R.A.A. has received grants from Ferring Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this study. M.H. K.H. and R.J.N. have no conflicts to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ACTRN12620001032943 TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE 11 August 2020 DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT 29 September 2020 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evidence suggests that one reason doctors provide certain interventions in assisted reproductive technologies (ART) is because of patient demand. This is particularly the case when it comes to unproven interventions such as 'add‐ons' to in vitro fertilisation (IVF) cycles, or providing IVF cycles that are highly unlikely to succeed. Doctors tend to accede to demands for such interventions because patients are willing to do and pay 'whatever it takes' to have a baby. However, there is uncertainty as to what moral weight should be placed on patient‐led demands in ART, including whether it is acceptable for such demands to be invoked as a justification for intervention. We address this issue in this paper. We start by elucidating what we mean by 'patient‐led demand' and synthesise some of the evidence for this phenomenon. We then argue that a doctor's professional role morality (PRM) yields special responsibilities, particularly in commercialised healthcare settings such as ART, because of the nature of professions as social institutions that are distinct from markets. We argue on this basis that, while there may be reasons (consistent with PRM) for doctors to accede to patient demand, this is not always the case. There is often a gap in justification between acceding to patient‐led demands and providing contested interventions, particularly in commercial settings. As a result, acceding to demand in such settings needs a strong justification to be consistent with PRM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundThere is increasing information characterizing menstrual cycle length in women, but less information is available on the potential differences across lifestyle variables. ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe differences in menstrual cycle length, variability, and menstrual phase across women of different ages and BMI among a global cohort of Flo app users. We have also reported on demographic and lifestyle characteristics across median cycle lengths. MethodsThe analysis was run based on the aggregated anonymized dataset from a menstrual cycle tracker and ovulation calendar that covers all phases of the reproductive cycle. Self-reported information is documented, including demographics, menstrual flow and cycle length, ovulation information, and reproductive health and diseases. Data from women aged ≥18 years and who had logged at least three cycles (ie, 2 completed cycles and 1 current cycle) in the Flo app were included (1,579,819 women). ResultsOf the 1.5 million users, approximately half (638,683/1,579,819, 40.42%) were aged between 18 and 24 years. Just over half of those reporting BMIs were in the normal range (18.5-24.9 kg/m2; 202,420/356,598, 56.76%) and one-third were overweight or obese (>25 kg/m2; 120,983/356,598, 33.93%). A total of 16.32% (257,889/1,579,819) of women had a 28-day median cycle length. There was a higher percentage of women aged ≥40 years who had a 27-day median cycle length than those aged between 18 and 24 years (22,294/120,612, 18.48% vs 60,870/637,601, 9.55%), but a lower percentage with a 29-day median cycle length (10,572/120,612, 8.77% vs 79,626/637,601, 12.49%). There were a higher number of cycles with short luteal phases in younger women, whereas women aged ≥40 years had a higher number of cycles with longer luteal phases. Median menstrual cycle length and the length of the follicular and luteal phases were not remarkably different with increasing BMI, except for the heaviest women at a BMI of ≥50 kg/m2. ConclusionsOn a global scale, we have provided extensive evidence on the characteristics of women and their menstrual cycle length and patterns across different age and BMI groups. This information is necessary to support updates of current clinical guidelines around menstrual cycle length and patterns for clinical use in fertility programs.

STUDY QUESTION Does ambient temperature exposure affect outcomes including clinical pregnancy and live birth in women undergoing IVF? SUMMARY ANSWER Both extreme cold and hot ambient temperatures were significantly associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes of IVF cycles. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Heat exposure has been linked to adverse pregnancy outcomes worldwide. However, the effect of ambient temperature on infertile women undergoing IVF treatment is unclear. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A retrospective cohort study was conducted from a database of 3452 infertile women who underwent their first fresh or frozen embryo transfer in the Shanghai First Maternity and Infant Hospital from April 2016 to December 2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Daily mean ambient temperature exposure for each patient was obtained based on their residential address. Temperature-stratified multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate associations between temperature exposure and pregnancy outcomes after controlling for confounders. Vulnerable sub-groups were identified using forest plots. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE The clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate were 45.7% and 37.1%, respectively. Regarding clinical pregnancy, a higher temperature during cold weather was significantly associated with a higher pregnancy rate in the period about 11 weeks before ovarian stimulation (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.102, 95% CI: 1.012–1.201). Regarding live birth, an increased temperature during cold weather was significantly related to a higher live birth rate in the period after confirmation of clinical pregnancy or biochemical pregnancy, with the aORs of 6.299 (95% CI: 3.949–10.047) or 10.486 (95% CI: 5.609–19.620), respectively. However, a higher temperature during hot weather was negatively associated with the live birth rate in the periods after confirmation of clinical pregnancy or biochemical pregnancy, with the aORs at 0.186 (95% CI: 0.121–0.285) or 0.302 (95% CI: 0.224–0.406), respectively. Moreover, the decline in live birth rates during cold and hot weather was accompanied by increased rates of early miscarriage (P  < 0.05). Stratified analyses identified susceptibility characteristics among the participants. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Climate monitoring data were used to represent individual temperature exposure levels according to the patient's residential address in the study. We were not able to obtain information of personal outdoor activity and use of indoor air conditioners in this retrospective study, which may affect actual temperature exposure. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS This study highlights that the ambient temperature exposure should be taken into account during IVF treatment and afterwards. There is a need to be alert to extremes in cold and hot ambient temperatures, especially during the period of follicle development and pregnancy. With this knowledge, clinicians can scientifically determine the timing of IVF treatment and reinforce patients' awareness of self-protection to minimize adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with extreme temperatures. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work was supported by a grant from the Clinical Research Plan of Shanghai Hospital Development Center [SHDC2020CR4080], a grant from the Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality [19411960500], and two grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China [81871213, 81671468]. B.W.M. is supported by a NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437). B.W.M. reports consultancy for ObsEva, and research grants from Merck KGaA, Ferring and Guerbet. The other authors have no conflict of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

STUDY QUESTION What is the recommended assessment and management of those with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and consumer preference? SUMMARY ANSWER International evidence-based guidelines address prioritized questions and outcomes and include 254 recommendations and practice points, to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes in PCOS. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY The 2018 International PCOS Guideline was independently evaluated as high quality and integrated multidisciplinary and consumer perspectives from six continents; it is now used in 196 countries and is widely cited. It was based on best available, but generally very low to low quality, evidence. It applied robust methodological processes and addressed shared priorities. The guideline transitioned from consensus based to evidence-based diagnostic criteria and enhanced accuracy of diagnosis, whilst promoting consistency of care. However, diagnosis is still delayed, the needs of those with PCOS are not being adequately met, evidence quality was low and evidence-practice gaps persist. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION The 2023 International Evidence-based Guideline update reengaged the 2018 network across professional societies and consumer organizations, with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. Extensive evidence synthesis was completed. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II (AGREEII)-compliant processes were followed. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength and diversity and inclusion were considered throughout. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS This summary should be read in conjunction with the full Guideline for detailed participants and methods. Governance included a six-continent international advisory and management committee, five guideline development groups, and paediatric, consumer, and translation committees. Extensive consumer engagement and guideline experts informed the update scope and priorities. Engaged international society-nominated panels included paediatrics, endocrinology, gynaecology, primary care, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, psychiatry, psychology, dietetics, exercise physiology, obesity care, public health and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis, statisticians and translation experts. Thirty-nine professional and consumer organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Twenty meetings and five face-to-face forums over 12 months addressed 58 prioritized clinical questions involving 52 systematic and 3 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations were developed and approved via consensus across five guideline panels, modified based on international feedback and peer review, independently reviewed for methodological rigour, and approved by the Australian Government National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE The evidence in the assessment and management of PCOS has generally improved in the past five years, but remains of low to moderate quality. The technical evidence report and analyses (∼6000 pages) underpins 77 evidence-based and 54 consensus recommendations, with 123 practice points. Key updates include: i) further refinement of individual diagnostic criteria, a simplified diagnostic algorithm and inclusion of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels as an alternative to ultrasound in adults only; ii) strengthening recognition of broader features of PCOS including metabolic risk factors, cardiovascular disease, sleep apnea, very high prevalence of psychological features, and high risk status for adverse outcomes during pregnancy; iii) emphasizing the poorly recognized, diverse burden of disease and the need for greater healthcare professional education, evidence-based patient information, improved models of care and shared decision making to improve patient experience, alongside greater research; iv) maintained emphasis on healthy lifestyle, emotional wellbeing and quality of life, with awareness and consideration of weight stigma; and v) emphasizing evidence-based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Overall, recommendations are strengthened and evidence is improved, but remains generally low to moderate quality. Significantly greater research is now needed in this neglected, yet common condition. Regional health system variation was considered and acknowledged, with a further process for guideline and translation resource adaptation provided. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The 2023 International Guideline for the Assessment and Management of PCOS provides clinicians and patients with clear advice on best practice, based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation program supports the Guideline with an integrated evaluation program. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This effort was primarily funded by the Australian Government via the National Health Medical Research Council (NHMRC) (APP1171592), supported by a partnership with American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Endocrine Society, European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology, and European Society for Endocrinology. The Commonwealth Government of Australia also supported Guideline translation through the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFCRI000266). HJT and AM are funded by NHMRC fellowships. JT is funded by a Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) fellowship. Guideline development group members were volunteers. Travel expenses were covered by the partnering organizations. Disclosures of interest were strictly managed according to NHMRC policy and are available with the full guideline, technical evidence report, peer review and responses (www.monash.edu/medicine/mchri/pcos). Of named authors HJT, CTT, AD, LM, LR, JBoyle, AM have no conflicts of interest to declare. JL declares grant from Ferring and Merck; consulting fees from Ferring and Titus Health Care; speaker's fees from Ferring; unpaid consultancy for Ferring, Roche Diagnostics and Ansh Labs; and sits on advisory boards for Ferring, Roche Diagnostics, Ansh Labs, and Gedeon Richter. TP declares a grant from Roche; consulting fees from Gedeon Richter and Organon; speaker's fees from Gedeon Richter and Exeltis; travel support from Gedeon Richter and Exeltis; unpaid consultancy for Roche Diagnostics; and sits on advisory boards for Roche Diagnostics. MC declares travels support from Merck; and sits on an advisory board for Merck. JBoivin declares grants from Merck Serono Ltd.; consulting fees from Ferring B.V; speaker's fees from Ferring Arzneimittell GmbH; travel support from Organon; and sits on an advisory board for the Office of Health Economics. RJN has received speaker's fees from Merck and sits on an advisory board for Ferring. AJoham has received speaker's fees from Novo Nordisk and Boehringer Ingelheim. The guideline was peer reviewed by special interest groups across our 39 partner and collaborating organizations, was independently methodologically assessed against AGREEII criteria and was approved by all members of the guideline development groups and by the NHMRC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study question: What is the recommended assessment and management of those with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and consumer preference? Summary answer: International evidence-based guidelines address prioritized questions and outcomes and include 254 recommendations and practice points, to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes in PCOS. What is known already: The 2018 International PCOS Guideline was independently evaluated as high quality and integrated multidisciplinary and consumer perspectives from 6 continents; it is now used in 196 countries and is widely cited. It was based on best available, but generally very lowto low-quality, evidence. It applied robust methodological processes and addressed shared priorities. The guideline transitioned from consensusbased to evidence-based diagnostic criteria and enhanced accuracy of diagnosis, whilst promoting consistency of care. However, diagnosis is still delayed, the needs of those with PCOS are not being adequately met, the evidence quality was low, and evidence-practice gaps persist. Study design, size, and duration: The 2023 International Evidence-based Guideline update re-engaged the 2018 network across professional societies and consumer organizations with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. Extensive evidence synthesis was completed. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREEII)-compliant processes were followed. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation, and ultimately recommendation strength, and diversity and inclusion were considered throughout. Participants/materials, setting, and methods: This summary should be read in conjunction with the full guideline for detailed participants and methods. Governance included a 6-continent international advisory and management committee, 5 guideline development groups, and paediatric, consumer, and translation committees. Extensive consumer engagement and guideline experts informed the update scope and priorities. Engaged international society-nominated panels included paediatrics, endocrinology, gynaecology, primary care, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, psychiatry, psychology, dietetics, exercise physiology, obesity care, public health, and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis, statisticians, and translation experts. Thirty-nine professional and consumer organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Twenty meetings and 5 face-to-face forums over 12 months addressed 58 prioritized clinical questions involving 52 systematic and 3 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations were developed and approved via consensus across 5 guideline panels, modified based on international feedback and peer review, independently reviewed for methodological rigour, and approved by the Australian Government National Health and Medical Research Council. Main results and the role of chance: The evidence in the assessment and management of PCOS has generally improved in the past 5 years but remains of low to moderate quality. The technical evidence report and analyses (~6000 pages) underpin 77 evidence-based and 54 consensus recommendations, with 123 practice points. Key updates include the following: (1) further refinement of individual diagnostic criteria, a simplified diagnostic algorithm, and inclusion of anti-Müllerian hormone levels as an alternative to ultrasound in adults only; (2) strengthening recognition of broader features of PCOS including metabolic risk factors, cardiovascular disease, sleep apnoea, very high prevalence of psychological features, and high risk status for adverse outcomes during pregnancy; (3) emphasizing the poorly recognized, diverse burden of disease and the need for greater healthcare professional education, evidence-based patient information, improved models of care, and shared decision-making to improve patient experience, alongside greater research; (4) maintained emphasis on healthy lifestyle, emotional well-being, and quality of life, with awareness and consideration of weight stigma; and (5) emphasizing evidence-based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management. Limitations and reasons for caution: Overall, recommendations are strengthened and evidence is improved but remains generally low to moderate quality. Significantly greater research is now needed in this neglected, yet common condition. Regional health system variation was considered and acknowledged, with a further process for guideline and translation resource adaptation provided. Wider implications of the findings: The 2023 International Guideline for the Assessment and Management of PCOS provides clinicians and patients with clear advice on best practice, based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input, and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated, and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation programme supports the guideline with an integrated evaluation programme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]