ArticleUrology2022
Access to Care for Infertile Men: Referral Patterns of Fertility Clinics in the United States.
Article in Urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate fertility clinic management of male factor infertility, including website educational content as well as factors associated with referral for urologic evaluation and care. MATERIALS AND
methodsUsing 2015-2018 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Fertility Clinic Success Rates Reports, 480 operative fertility clinics in the United States were identified. Clinic websites were systematically reviewed for content regarding male infertility. Structured telephone interviews of clinic representatives were performed to determine clinic-specific practices for management of male factor infertility. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to predict how clinic characteristics (geographic region, practice size, practice setting, proximity to urologist, in-state andrology fellowship, state-mandated fertility coverage, annual in vitro fertilization cycles, and percentage of in vitro fertilization cycles for male factor infertility) were associated with patient referral to a urologist for male infertility care.
resultsWe interviewed 477 fertility clinics and analyzed available websites (n = 474). The majority of websites (77%) discussed male infertility evaluation while 46% discussed treatment. Fifty clinics (11%) had an on-site urologist. Clinics with on-site urologists were more likely to be larger practices, academically affiliated, and discuss male infertility treatment on their website (all P ≤ .05). For clinics without an on-site urologist, practice size and presence of an in-state andrology fellowship program were the strongest predictors of urologic referral (P <.02).
conclusionVariability in patient-facing education and infertility practice setting and size influence access to urologic care for couples with male factor infertility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.