Recommendations from the WHO guideline for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infertility
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The field of sexual and reproductive health care, including family planning has progressed in the last several decades. Significant progress has also been made in the field of medically assisted reproduction. Globally one in six people experience infertility in their lifetime. However, many countries do not include the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infertility in health policies, financing and services, and many do not have national clinical guidelines for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of infertility. OBJECTIVE: To determine what interventions are recommended for prevention, diagnosis and treatment of infertility among individuals and couples. DESIGN, SETTING: The guideline was developed according to the WHO handbook for guideline development. A Guideline Development Group (GDG) was assembled and included a multidisciplinary and regionally diverse set of clinicians, policymakers, researchers, implementers and representatives of patient groups (n=30). The GDG prioritised key recommendation questions to address in the guideline. New systematic reviews were conducted, or existing reviews updated, to inform the recommendations. The GRADE approach was used to assess the certainty of the evidence and to guide the formulation of recommendations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The GDG interpreted evidence and made judgments about the balance between benefits and harms (including patients' values) as well as costs, feasibility, acceptability, and equity. The recommendations were drafted, reviewed by an External Review Group (ERG) comprising 30 members, and approved by the WHO. RESULTS: The guideline makes good practice statements related to the general management of infertility (n=6) including (i) selection of tests, (ii) listening to individuals and couples with infertility, (iii) choosing treatment decisions, (iv) clinical follow-up, and (v) documenting outcomes of treatment. In relation to prevention, it provides recommendations related to the provision of information about fertility and infertility (n=1) and reduction of infertility risk from sexually transmitted infections (STIs; n=1), lifestyle factors (n=1), and tobacco use (n=1). In terms of diagnosis, recommendations for diagnosing infertility caused by ovulatory dysfunction (n=3), tubal disease (n=1), or uterine cavity abnormalities (n=5) among females are provided. For males, the guideline provides recommendations regarding when a semen test should be repeated (n=2). Also included is a recommendation for diagnosing unexplained infertility (n=1). Regarding treatment, the guideline provides recommendations related to the treatment of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS, n=6), tubal disease (n=5), uterine septae (n=1), varicocele (n=4), and unexplained infertility (n=6). Based on available evidence, the GDG did not make a recommendation for or against the use of antioxidant supplements in males. Most recommendations were conditional because relevant evidence was either absent, or of low or very low certainty. Critical research gaps were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The World Health Organization (WHO) made 40 recommendations and six good practice statements for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of infertility. By centring equity, science, and the imperative to provide fertility care as part of universal health coverage, the guideline aims to support countries in delivering high-quality, equitable, and effective healthcare for all. Although the guideline is primarily intended for use by health care professionals, it is an important source for policymakers to inform national guidelines and to inform the work of professional patient support, including advocacy organizations, funding and philanthropic agencies, civil society, professional societies and other nongovernmental organizations that provide social, financial and technical support to reproductive health programmes. The recommendations do not cover all aspects of infertility and fertility care, but subsequent editions of the guideline will expand the scope of recommendations.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».