scholarly journals Top 10 priorities for future infertility research: an international consensus development study†‡

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
pp. 2715-2724 ◽  
Author(s):  
J M N Duffy ◽  
G D Adamson ◽  
E Benson ◽  
S Bhattacharya ◽  
S Bhattacharya ◽  
...  

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Can the priorities for future research in infertility be identified? SUMMARY ANSWER The top 10 research priorities for the four areas of male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction and ethics, access and organization of care for people with fertility problems were identified. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Many fundamental questions regarding the prevention, management and consequences of infertility remain unanswered. This is a barrier to improving the care received by those people with fertility problems. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Potential research questions were collated from an initial international survey, a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and Cochrane systematic reviews. A rationalized list of confirmed research uncertainties was prioritized in an interim international survey. Prioritized research uncertainties were discussed during a consensus development meeting. Using a formal consensus development method, the modified nominal group technique, diverse stakeholders identified the top 10 research priorities for each of the categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction and ethics, access and organization of care. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems and others (healthcare funders, healthcare providers, healthcare regulators, research funding bodies and researchers) were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE The initial survey was completed by 388 participants from 40 countries, and 423 potential research questions were submitted. Fourteen clinical practice guidelines and 162 Cochrane systematic reviews identified a further 236 potential research questions. A rationalized list of 231 confirmed research uncertainties was entered into an interim prioritization survey completed by 317 respondents from 43 countries. The top 10 research priorities for each of the four categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility (including age-related infertility, ovarian cysts, uterine cavity abnormalities and tubal factor infertility), medically assisted reproduction (including ovarian stimulation, IUI and IVF) and ethics, access and organization of care were identified during a consensus development meeting involving 41 participants from 11 countries. These research priorities were diverse and seek answers to questions regarding prevention, treatment and the longer-term impact of infertility. They highlight the importance of pursuing research which has often been overlooked, including addressing the emotional and psychological impact of infertility, improving access to fertility treatment, particularly in lower resource settings and securing appropriate regulation. Addressing these priorities will require diverse research methodologies, including laboratory-based science, qualitative and quantitative research and population science. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, methodological decisions informed by professional judgment and arbitrary consensus definitions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS We anticipate that identified research priorities, developed to specifically highlight the most pressing clinical needs as perceived by healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems and others, will help research funding organizations and researchers to develop their future research agenda. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The study was funded by the Auckland Medical Research Foundation, Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. G.D.A. reports research sponsorship from Abbott, personal fees from Abbott and LabCorp, a financial interest in Advanced Reproductive Care, committee membership of the FIGO Committee on Reproductive Medicine, International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, International Federation of Fertility Societies and World Endometriosis Research Foundation, and research sponsorship of the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies from Abbott and Ferring. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. J.L.H.E. reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. A.W.H. reports research sponsorship from the Chief Scientist’s Office, Ferring, Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research and Wellbeing of Women and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Ferring, Nordic Pharma and Roche Diagnostics. M.L.H. reports grants from Merck, grants from Myovant, grants from Bayer, outside the submitted work and ownership in Embrace Fertility, a private fertility company. N.P.J. reports research sponsorship from AbbVie and Myovant Sciences and consultancy fees from Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Roche Diagnostics and Vifor Pharma. J.M.L.K. reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. R.S.L. reports consultancy fees from AbbVie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. B.W.M. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. E.H.Y.N. reports research sponsorship from Merck. C.N. reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring and retains a financial interest in NexHand. J.S. reports being employed by a National Health Service fertility clinic, consultancy fees from Merck for educational events, sponsorship to attend a fertility conference from Ferring and being a clinical subeditor of Human Fertility. A.S. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. J.W. reports being a statistical editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. A.V. reports that he is a Statistical Editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology & Fertility Review Group and the journal Reproduction. His employing institution has received payment from Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority for his advice on review of research evidence to inform their ‘traffic light’ system for infertility treatment ‘add-ons’. N.L.V. reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the present work. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.

2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 649-657
Author(s):  
Parnaz Borjian Boroujeni ◽  
Somayeh Ebrahimian ◽  
Maryam Abedini ◽  
Maral Rostami Chayjan ◽  
Mahdye Hassani ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 110-122
Author(s):  
Bruno Saintôt ◽  

One of France’s leading bioethics experts discusses the debate around assisted reproductive technologies, in particular, the issue of legal access to such technologies for single women and same-sex female couples. The author offers his detailed — and mostly critical — commentary on the advisory documents, issued by the “National Ethics Advisory Committee”, a special body created to publicly discuss issues of bioethics legislation. (In August 2020, three years after the publication of this article, the French National Assembly approved the new version of the Law on Bioethics that was discussed in this paper).


Author(s):  
М.В. Андреева ◽  
М.И. Штаут ◽  
Т.М. Сорокина ◽  
Л.Ф. Курило ◽  
В.Б. Черных

Обследованы 19 мужчин с нарушением фертильности, носителей транслокаций rob(13;14) и rob(13;15). Показано, что нарушение репродуктивной функции обусловлено блоком сперматогенеза в профазе I мейоза, приводящего к азооспермии или олигоастенотератозооспермии и мужскому бесплодию. We examined 19 infertile men, carriers of translocations rob (13;14) and rob (13;15). We assume that fertility problems are resulted from spermatogenesis impairment because of meiotic arrest at prophase I stages, that leads to azoospermia or oligoastenoteratozoospermia and male infertility.


Pathogens ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 947
Author(s):  
Rishi Kondapaneni ◽  
Ashley N. Malcolm ◽  
Brian M. Vazquez ◽  
Eric Zeng ◽  
Tse-Yu Chen ◽  
...  

Florida lies within a subtropical region where the climate allows diverse mosquito species including invasive species to thrive year-round. As of 2021, there are currently 66 state-approved Florida Mosquito Control Districts, which are major stakeholders for Florida public universities engaged in mosquito research. Florida is one of the few states with extensive organized mosquito control programs. The Florida State Government and Florida Mosquito Control Districts have long histories of collaboration with research institutions. During fall 2020, we carried out a survey to collect baseline data on the current control priorities from Florida Mosquito Control Districts relating to (1) priority control species, (2) common adult and larval control methods, and (3) major research questions to address that will improve their control and surveillance programs. The survey data showed that a total of 17 distinct mosquito species were considered to be priority control targets, with many of these species being understudied. The most common control approaches included truck-mounted ultra-low-volume adulticiding and biopesticide-based larviciding. The districts held interest in diverse research questions, with many prioritizing studies on basic science questions to help develop evidence-based control strategies. Our data highlight the fact that mosquito control approaches and priorities differ greatly between districts and provide an important point of comparison for other regions investing in mosquito control, particularly those with similar ecological settings, and great diversity of potential mosquito vectors, such as in Florida. Our findings highlight a need for greater alignment of research priorities between mosquito control and mosquito research. In particular, we note a need to prioritize filling knowledge gaps relating to understudied mosquito species that have been implicated in arbovirus transmission.


1970 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-30
Author(s):  
R Sogarwal ◽  
D Bachani

Introduction: During the fi rst 2 years of the fi ve year plan of India’s National AIDS Control Programme Phase-III (NACP-III; 2007-12), various interactive consultative workshops were organized in collaboration with development partners with the objective of identifying priority areas for operational research and further development of research protocols adopting mentorship approach. Methodology: This article is an attempt to present the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) which was used to identify a set of fundable and practically feasible research priorities under NACP-III specifi cally focusing on Prevention of Parent to Child Transmission (PPTCT) and Pediatric HIV Care in India. The activity was undertaken with support of UNICEF in the year 2010. A total of 110 persons participated in the consultation clustering into 37, 36 and 37 members in Group A, B and C, respectively. The participants refl ected the mix of policy makers / decision makers (8), programme managers (12), implementers (36), subject experts / researchers (28), other stakeholders (16). Results: A total of nine highest priority research questions were identifi ed by all the groups in the assigned themes. The value of Kendall’s W coeffi cient of concordance was 0.68, which shows signifi cant agreement among raters on priority research questions (chi-square=16.35; p=0.03). Conclusion: Based on our experience, we can conclude that NGT was found to be an important tool for setting research priorities that is more democratic and transparent than the traditional methods. By applying various stages of the group sessions, participants can experience the rethinking process with reference information to enhance their judgment. The results of our experience may help programme managers / policy makers to plan similar and more improved method in other element of NACP as well as other health programmes. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/saarctb.v8i1.5888 SAARCTB 2011; 8(1): 20-30


2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (11) ◽  
pp. 2476-2485 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Gameiro ◽  
J. Boivin ◽  
E. Dancet ◽  
C. de Klerk ◽  
M. Emery ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Sarah McLachlan ◽  
Hilary Bungay

Abstract Background Consensus methods such as the Delphi technique have been used widely for research priority setting in health care. Within pre-hospital emergency medicine, such approaches have helped to establish national and international research priorities. However, in a dynamic field such as pre-hospital critical care, it is necessary to regularly review the continued relevance of findings. Further, considering the variability between pre-hospital critical care providers, it is also important to determine priorities at the local level. Essex & Herts Air Ambulance (EHAAT) sought to develop a five-year research strategy that aligns with their clinical work streams and organisational priorities. Methods All staff and Trustees were invited to participate in an online Delphi study with three Rounds. The Delphi was administered via email and Online Surveys software. The first Round invited participants to submit up to five research questions that they felt were of greatest importance to EHAAT  to advance the care provided to patients. In Round 2, participants were asked to rate the importance of questions from Round 1, while Round 3 required participants to rank questions that were prioritised in Round 2 in order of importance. Results 22 participants submitted a total of 86 research questions in Round 1, which were reduced to 69 questions following deduplication and refinement. 11 participants rated the importance of the questions in Round 2, resulting in 14 questions being taken forward to Round 3. Following the ranking exercise in Round 3, completed by 12 participants, a top five research priorities were identified. The question deemed most important was “How does a pre-hospital doctor-paramedic team affect the outcome of patients with severe head injuries?”. Conclusions The top five research priorities identified through the Delphi process will inform EHAAT’s research strategy. Findings suggest that there is still work to be done in addressing research priorities described in previous literature.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document