目的:关于不孕症和生育护理指标的类型和维度的文献范围是什么?
结论:大多数现有的不孕症和生育护理指标是有效性和效率维度的结果指标。
背景:使用适当的,不育和生育护理的相关和有效指标对于监测获取至关重要,公平和利用。
未经评估:进行了系统范围审查。我们搜索了MEDLINE,Pubmed,JSTOR,CINAHL,从成立到2022年5月,WebofScience和Scopus电子数据库没有语言或日期限制。我们搜索了相关组织的灰色文献和在线图书馆。我们手工搜索了相关参考文献的列表。
方法:这项范围界定系统评价遵循Arksey和O\'Malley以及JoannaBriggs研究所指南的框架。独立筛选通过搜索确定的记录并提取数据。我们通过按类型学和维度对报告的指标进行分组来进行概念综合。结构化制表和图形综合与叙事评论一起使用。
结果:我们纳入了来自88个国家的46份报告。在63个国家(72%)自愿报告不孕症和生育护理指标,在25个国家(28%)强制报告。周期或交付的报告基于56个国家的单个周期(64%)和32个国家的累积周期(36%)。大多数指标被用作结果指标,很少被用作过程指标或结构指标。对于指标的维度,大多数指标被用作有效性和效率指标,很少被用作安全指标,以病人为中心,公平性和及时性。
结论:大多数指标属于辅助生殖技术领域,由生育诊所报告。安全指标,以病人为中心,公平性和及时性以及非临床指标几乎看不见。
结论:文献中存在大量的不孕症和生育护理指标。大多数指标是有效性和效率指标,虽然安全指标,以病人为中心,公平性和及时性几乎看不见。当前指标的范围表明主要关注临床指标,非临床指标和ART领域以外的指标具有很大的不可见性。在确定一套核心指标的进一步工作中,需要考虑这些差距。
背景:这项工作得到了开发署-人口基金-儿童基金会-世卫组织-世界银行特别研究方案的资助,人类生殖发展与研究培训(HRP),由世界卫生组织(WHO)执行的共同赞助计划。作者没有竞争的利益。
背景:开放科学框架vsu42。
OBJECTIVE: What is the scope of literature regarding infertility and fertility care indicators in terms of types and dimensions of these indicators?
CONCLUSIONS: Most available infertility and fertility care indicators are outcomes indicators of effectiveness and efficiency dimensions.
BACKGROUND: The use of appropriate, relevant and valid indicators of infertility and fertility care is critical for monitoring access, equity and utilization.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic scoping review was conducted. We searched MEDLINE, Pubmed, JSTOR, CINAHL, Web of Science and Scopus electronic databases from inception to May 2022 without imposing language or date restrictions. We searched gray literature and online libraries of relevant organizations. We hand-searched the list of relevant references.
METHODS: This scoping systematic review followed the framework of Arksey and O\'Malley and the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. Records identified by the search were independently screened and data were extracted. We performed conceptual synthesis by grouping the reported indicators by typology and dimensions. Structured tabulation and graphical synthesis were used along with narrative commentary.
RESULTS: We included 46 reports from 88 countries. The reporting of infertility and fertility care indicators was voluntary in 63 countries (72%) and compulsory in 25 countries (28%). Reporting for cycles or deliveries was based on individual cycles in 56 countries (64%) and on cumulative cycles in 32 countries (36%). Most indicators were utilized as outcome indicators with fewer being process indicators or structural indicators. For the dimension of indicators, most indicators were utilized as effectiveness and efficiency indicators with fewer utilized as indicators of safety, patient-centeredness, equity and timeliness.
CONCLUSIONS: Most indicators fall into the domain of assisted reproductive technology and are reported by fertility clinics. Indicators of safety, patient-centeredness, equity and timeliness as well as non-clinical indicators are almost invisible.
CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of indicators of infertility and fertility care exist in literature. Most indicators were effectiveness and efficiency indicators, while indicators of safety, patient-centeredness, equity and timeliness remain almost invisible. The scope of the current indicators indicates a predominant focus on clinical metrics, with substantial invisibility of non-clinical indicators and indicators outside the ART domain. These gaps need to be considered in further work of identifying a core set of indicators.
BACKGROUND: This work received funding from the UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), a cosponsored program executed by the World Health Organization (WHO). The authors had no competing interests.
BACKGROUND: Open Science Framework vsu42.