Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40557823›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2025

To err is human, also in medically assisted reproduction: a cross-sectional study on error management practices†.

ESHRE Special Interest Group Safety and Quality in ART, and Ethics and Law, Alessandra Alteri, Kelly Tilleman, Nathalie Vermeulen, Giuliana Baccino, Kenny A Rodriguez-Wallberg, Arianna D'Angelo, Theofano Bounartzi, Zdravka Veleva, Heidi Mertes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

ESHRE Special Interest Group Safety and Quality in ART, and Ethics and Law
Alessandra AlteriObstetrics and Gynaecology Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3092-3546
Kelly TillemanDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8832-2888
Nathalie VermeulenESHRE Central Office, Strombeek-Bever, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8046-6799
Giuliana BaccinoNewLifeBank, Madrid, Spain.
Kenny A Rodriguez-WallbergDivision of Gynecology and Reproduction, Department of Reproductive Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-4378-6181
Arianna D'AngeloSeha Fertility Centre, Corniche Hospital, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.ORCID 0000-0002-1505-8489
Theofano BounartziDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, School of Health Sciences, University of Thessaly, Larissa, Greece.
Zdravka VelevaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-4896-7697
Heidi MertesDepartment of Philosophy and Moral Science, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-3029-2158

Funding

ESHRE
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionHow do medically assisted reproduction (MAR) centres manage errors, and what are the practices for reporting adverse incidents and non-conformities to National Competent Authorities (NCA) and disclosing them to patients? SUMMARY ANSWER: The study reveals a diverse landscape of error management practices in MAR centres, with varying approaches to reporting and disclosure, emphasizing a mix of transparency and systematic management of non-conformities. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Previous studies have highlighted the critical nature of error management in MAR settings which are inherently susceptible to errors due to their complexity. Despite this recognition, comprehensive data on error management practices across different MAR centres have been limited. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A cross-sectional study was set up to gather data on the current practice with regards to error management at MAR centres. Data were collected between 25 April and 25 May 2022. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,

methodsAn online survey was designed, using the online SurveyMonkey tool, to consist of 17 questions concerning three domains: error management in the MAR centre, reporting to NCA and disclosure of non-conformities to patients. The survey was distributed to professionals working in MAR centres through the ESHRE membership mailing list. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 464 replies were received and following exclusion of invalid results, the final dataset included the replies of 387 respondents. A majority, ∼71.6% of respondents, confirmed that both laboratory and clinical non-conformities are systematically recorded, predominantly using digital platforms. Mainly, all types of errors are recorded based on their severity, including near-misses. In terms of discussing incidents, about 85.8% of the centres reported that they regularly hold meetings to review them. However, practices varied considerably when it came to reporting non-conformities to the NCA and disclosing them to patients. Only 15.1% of respondents reported all types of incidents (major, moderate, and significant) to the NCA, while a significant portion, 65.6%, indicated that they report only major incidents. Concerning disclosure practices to patients, a majority (52%) stated that their centres always communicate incidents to patients, indicating a trend towards transparency in patient care. However, 11.7% of respondents mentioned that they do not disclose to patients, highlighting a gap in proactive patient communication in some centres. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study's sample may not be representative of all MAR centres, with a potential bias towards practices in countries with higher respondent rates (Spain, UK, Italy); also the possibility of having received multiple responses from the same centre could not be ruled out. Additionally, despite survey anonymity, there may be a tendency for respondents to provide socially desirable answers. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsThese findings contribute to a broader understanding of error management in MAR centres worldwide, highlighting the need for standardized reporting systems and more transparent communication with patients. This study also underscores the importance of fostering a culture of safety and continuous learning from non-conformities in the MAR sector. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): K.T. disclosed support for attending meetings and/or travel from Ferring, Cooper Surgical, Fujifilm, and Vitrolife group. K.R.-W. disclosed support from Radiumhemmets Forskningsfonder and The Swedish Cancer Society; grants from Swedish Research Council, Swedish Cancer Society, Swedish Childhood Cancer Fund, Radiumhemmets Forskningsfonder, Stockholm County Council FoU, Karolinska Institutet and IngaBritt och Arne Lundbergs Forskningsstiftelse; royalties; consulting fees from the Swedish Ministry of Health and Welfare; honoraria from Roche (for chairmanship and lectures), Pfizer (for chairmanship and lectures), Organon (lectures), and IBSA (Advisory Board for educational event); support for meetings and/or travel from Organon and Regionstockholm; participation at advisory boards for Merck and Ferring; receipt of equipment from Merck and Ferring. Z.V. disclosed research grants from ESHRE and Juhani Aaltonen Foundation; and support for meetings and/or travel from ESHRE. The other authors had no competing interests to disclose. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Indexed as

Medical ErrorsReproductive Techniques, AssistedRisk ManagementCross-Sectional StudiesDisclosureFemaleHumansSurveys and Questionnairesassisted reproduction technologieserror managementfertilityincidentIVFnon-conformitiesquality managementsurvey

Identifiers

PMID40557823
PMCPMC12314145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.