Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26184507›Full record

ArticleReproductive health2015

Development and initial validation of a fertility experiences questionnaire.

F Scarlett Thomas, Joseph B Stanford, Jessica N Sanders, Shawn E Gurtcheff, Mark Gibson, Christina A Porucznik, Sara E Simonsen

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

F Scarlett ThomasOffice of Cooperative Reproductive Health, Division of Public Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Utah, 375 Chipeta Way Suite A, 84108, Salt Lake, UT, USA.
Joseph B StanfordOffice of Cooperative Reproductive Health, Division of Public Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Utah, 375 Chipeta Way Suite A, 84108, Salt Lake, UT, USA. joseph.stanford@utah.edu.
Jessica N SandersOffice of Cooperative Reproductive Health, Division of Public Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Utah, 375 Chipeta Way Suite A, 84108, Salt Lake, UT, USA.
Shawn E GurtcheffUtah Fertility Center, 1446 W. Pleasant Grove Blvd, 84062, Pleasant Grove, UT, USA.
Mark GibsonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Utah, USA.
Christina A PorucznikOffice of Cooperative Reproductive Health, Division of Public Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Utah, 375 Chipeta Way Suite A, 84108, Salt Lake, UT, USA.
Sara E SimonsenOffice of Cooperative Reproductive Health, Division of Public Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Utah, 375 Chipeta Way Suite A, 84108, Salt Lake, UT, USA.
University of Utah · USUtah Department of Health · US

Funding

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGY FAILUREP01HD037074 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO · PI ADLER, NANCY E · 1999 to 2003
$9.4M
Outcomes of Infertility Treatments in Clinic and Population-Based CohortsR21HD060213 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI STANFORD, JOSEPH BARNEY · 2009 to 2010
$409k
NICHD NIH HHS 1-P01-HD-37074NICHD NIH HHS P01 HD037074NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD060213NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD060213-01A1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany women throughout the world have history of subfertility (resolved or unresolved), but much remains unknown about services and treatments chosen.

methodsWe developed a mixed-mode fertility experiences questionnaire (FEQ) in 2009 through literature review and iterative pilot work to optimize question format and mode of administration. The focus of the FEQ is to collect data retrospectively on time at risk for pregnancy, fertility treatments received and declined, pregnancy, time to pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes. We conducted a validation of key elements of the FEQ with comparison to medical records in 2009 and 2010. The validation sample was selected from women initially seen at a specialized fertility treatment center in Utah in 2004.

resultsThe FEQ was optimized with two components: 1) written (paper or web-based), self-administered, followed by 2) telephone- administered questions. In 63 patients analyzed, high levels of correlation were identified between patient self-report and medical records for the use of intrauterine insemination and assisted reproductive technology, pregnancy and live birth histories, time at risk for pregnancy and time to pregnancy. There was low correlation between medical records and self-report for the use of oral ovulation drugs and injectable ovulation drugs. Compared to the medical record, the FEQ was over 90% sensitive for all elements, except injectable ovulation drugs (70% sensitivity).

conclusionsThe FEQ accurately captured elements of fertility treatment history at 5-6 years after the first visit to a specialty clinic.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesAdultFemaleFertilityHumansInfertilityPilot ProjectsPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePregnancy RateReproductive Techniques, AssistedSocioeconomic FactorsTime-to-PregnancyUtah

Identifiers

PMID26184507
PMCPMC4504457
OpenAlexW2135103402

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.