fertility clinics websites

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    本研究旨在系统分析英国生育诊所网站提供的延时成像(TLI)信息。我们对106个为自费患者提供生育治疗的临床网站进行了分析。该分析旨在检查这些诊所是否提供TLI,患者的相关费用,以及所提供信息的清晰度和质量。在分析的106个网站中,71(67%)声称提供TLI。在这些网站中,25(35.2%)提到向患者收费在300英镑至850英镑之间,25(35.8%)声称不向患者收费,21人(29.6%)未提供TLI的任何费用信息.此外,64个(90.1%)网站声称或暗示TLI通过增强胚胎选择来改善临床结果。值得注意的是,34(47.9%)个网站没有提到或提供任何HFEA评级系统的链接。至关重要的是为患者提供清晰准确的信息,使他们能够就TLI做出充分知情的决定。特别是当他们负责相关的成本。这项研究的结果引起了人们对生育诊所网站上可用信息的可靠性和准确性的担忧,这些信息通常是患者的主要信息来源。
    This study aims to systematically analyze the provision of information on Time-lapse Imaging (TLI) by UK fertility clinic websites. We conducted an analysis of 106 clinic websites that offer fertility treatment to self-funded patients. The analysis aimed to examine whether these clinics offer TLI, the associated cost for patients, and the clarity and quality of the provided information. Out of the 106 websites analysed, 71 (67%) claimed to offer TLI. Among these websites, 25 (35.2%) mentioned charging patients between £300 and £850, 25 (35.8%) claimed not to charge patients, and 21 (29.6%) did not provide any cost information for TLI. Furthermore, 64 (90.1%) websites made claims or implied that TLI leads to improved clinical outcomes by enhancing embryo selection. Notably, 34 (47.9%) websites did not mention or provide any links to the HFEA rating system. It is crucial to provide patients with clear and accurate information to enable them to make fully informed decisions about TLI, particularly when they are responsible for the associated costs. The findings of this study raise concerns about the reliability and accuracy of the information available on fertility clinic websites, which are typically the primary source of information for patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    \"Add-on\" procedures are actively promoted on some fertility clinic websites as proven means to improve IVF success rates, especially for couples with repeated implantation/IVF failures. However, the actual contribution of these interventions to live birth rates remains inconclusive. At present, little is known about the type and quality of the information provided on the IVF clinics\' websites regarding the merits of \"add-ons.\" A systematic evaluation of the quality of information on \"add-on\" procedures in fertility clinic websites was performed using 10-criteria structured questionnaire. We included English language websites that presented in the Google.com search engine after typing the following key-words:\"endometrial scratching\"(ES), \"intralipid infusions\"(ILI), \"assisted hatching\"(AHA), \"PGT-A,\" or \"PGS\". In total, 254 websites were evaluated. In most cases, an accurate description of the \"add-on\" procedures was provided (78.8%). However, only a minority (12%) reported their undetermined effectiveness. The use of PGT-A was more often encouraged (52.8%) than ES (23.6%) and AHA (16%). The cost was infrequently presented (6.9%). Scientific references were only rarely provided for ILI, versus 12.7% for ES, 4.0% for AHA, and 5.6% for PGT-A. The information entry date was often missing. None of the websites reported the clinic\'s pregnancy-rate following the \"add-on\" procedures. Information on \"add-ons\" available to patients from IVF clinic websites is often inaccurate. This could perpetuate false myths among infertile patients about these procedures and raises concern regarding possible commercial bias. It is imperative that IVF clinic websites will better communicate the associated risks and uncertainties of \"add-ons\" to prospective patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号