MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3082422345 · doi:10.1093/humrep/deaa248

Fertility patients under COVID-19: attitudes, perceptions and psychological reactions

2020· article· en· W3082422345 sur OpenAlexaff
Reut Ben‐Kimhy, Michal Youngster, Tamar R. Medina-Artom, Sarit Avraham, Itai Gat, Lilach Marom Haham, Ariel Hourvitz, Alon Kedem

Notice bibliographique

RevueHuman Reproduction · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueReproductive Health and Technologies
Établissements canadiensCReATe Fertility Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAnxietyDistressFertilityFeelingInfertilityMedicineClinical psychologyPandemicSocial supportPsychologyDiseasePsychiatryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PopulationPregnancySocial psychologyInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

STUDY QUESTION: What are the perceptions of infertility patients and the factors correlating with their psychological distress, following suspension of fertility treatments during the Corona Virus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic? SUMMARY ANSWER: Most patients preferred to resume treatment given the chance regardless of background characteristics; higher self-mastery and greater perceived social support were associated with lower distress, while feeling helpless was associated with higher distress. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Infertility diagnosis and treatment frequently result in significant psychological distress. Recently published data have shown that clinic closure during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a sharp increase in the prevalence of anxiety and depression among infertile patients undergoing IVF and was perceived as an uncontrollable and stressful event. Personal resources play an important protective role in times of crisis, helping reduce levels of distress. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This cross-sectional questionnaire study included patients whose fertility treatment was suspended following the COVID-19 pandemic, in a tertiary hospital. The survey was delivered to 297 patients within 12 days at the beginning of April 2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The self-administered questionnaire included items addressing: (i) patients' demographic characteristics, (ii) anxiety related to COVID-19 infection risk and level of social support, (iii) patients' perceptions of the new guidelines and description of subsequently related emotions and (iv) two validated scales assessing levels of emotional distress and self-mastery. Multivariate analysis was conducted to assess factors alleviating or increasing emotional distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: There were 168 patients who completed the survey, giving a response rate of 57%. Study variables in the regression model explained 38.9% of the variance in psychological distress experienced by patients during treatment suspension. None of the background characteristics (e.g. age, marital status, parity, economic level or duration of treatments) had a significant contribution. Feeling helpless following the suspension of treatments was associated with higher distress (P < 0.01). Higher self-mastery and greater perceived social support were associated with lower distress (P < 0.01). Despite the ministry of health's decision, 72% of patients wished to resume treatment at the time of survey. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This was a cross-sectional study, thus information about patients' characteristics prior to the COVID-19 pandemic was not available. The length and implications of this pandemic are unknown. Therefore, the ability to draw conclusions about the psychological consequences of the crisis is limited at this point of time. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Personal resources play an important protective role in times of crisis, helping to reduce levels of distress. Study findings suggest that attention should be paid to strengthening and empowering patients' personal resources together with directly confronting and containing feelings of helplessness. In line with the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) guidelines, especially at this time of high levels of distress, it is imperative to offer emotional support to reduce stress and concerns. Furthermore, as the pandemic is stabilizing, resumption of treatment should be considered as soon as appropriate according to local conditions. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by the IVF unit of the Shamir Medical Center. All authors declare no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,003
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,008

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,195
Tête enseignante GPT0,427
Écart entre enseignants0,232 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations125
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHuman ReproductionMême sujetReproductive Health and TechnologiesTravaux en français237 207