Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Fertil Steril. 2014 Jan;101(1):222-6. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.09.008. Epub 2013 Oct 17.

What is the quality of information on social oocyte cryopreservation provided by websites of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology member fertility clinics?

Author information

1
IVF Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the Chaim Sheba Medical Center, and the Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
2
Department of Statistics and Operations Research, the Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
3
Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
4
IVF Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the Chaim Sheba Medical Center, and the Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. Electronic address: dseidman@tau.ac.il.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate adequacy and adherence to American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) guidelines of internet information provided by Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART)-affiliated clinics regarding social oocyte cryopreservation (SOC).

DESIGN:

Systematic evaluation of websites of all SART member fertility clinics.

SETTING:

The internet.

PATIENT(S):

None.

INTERVENTION(S):

All websites offering SOC services were scored using a 0-13 scale, based on 10 questions designed to assess website quality and adherence to the ASRM/SART guidelines. The websites were analyzed independently by two authors. Whenever disagreement occurred, a third investigator determined the score.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S):

Scores defined website quality as excellent, ≥9; moderate, 5-8; or poor, ≤4 points.

RESULT(S):

Of the 387 clinics registered as SART members, 200 offered oocyte cryopreservation services for either medical or social reasons; 147 of these advertised SOC. The average website scores of those clinics offering SOC was 3.4 ± 2.1 (range, 2-11) points. There was no significant difference in scores between private versus academic clinics or clinics performing more or less than 500 cycles per year.

CONCLUSION(S):

The majority of the websites do not follow the SART/ASRM guidelines for SOC, indicating that there is a need to improve the type and quality of information provided on SOC by SART member websites.

KEYWORDS:

Nonmedical oocyte cryopreservation; internet; websites

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center