ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025
Opportunities to optimize patient experience in the in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinic and the role of genetic counselors.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo understand factors influencing patient satisfaction with genetics education and psychosocial support in an IVF clinic without a genetic counselor (GC), and how the role of a GC may fill gaps in care using a mixed-method cross-sectional study.
methodsPrevious IVF patients (n = 133) completed a survey assessing satisfaction with genetics education and psychosocial support and decisional conflict about genetic testing. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare satisfaction level to demographic and clinical variables. Spearman's correlation was used to analyze decisional conflict. Focus groups with 12 total participants expanded on themes identified in survey responses. Thematic analysis was performed using interpretive description.
resultsParticipants reported satisfaction with their genetics education experience (78.9% somewhat or extremely satisfied). Satisfaction with genetics education was associated with satisfaction with information received about genetic testing results (H = 21.3, p < 0.01) and confidence using results in future decisions (H = 9.9, p < 0.01). Participants desired thorough pre-test and post-test counseling regarding genetic testing and directive guidance. Decision conflict about genetic testing was low (mean of 22.3, range 0-100). Satisfaction with genetics education was inversely correlated with decisional conflict (r
conclusionsPatients felt satisfied with genetics education and psychosocial support provided by clinical providers. Gaps in care included misconceptions regarding genetic testing, a desire for more thorough counseling about genetic testing options, more directive guidance, and increased psychosocial support through external sources such as support groups.
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.