Testing an Evidence-Based Self-Help Program for Infertility-Related Distress: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Infertility-the inability to achieve pregnancy despite ≥12 months of focused attempts to conceive-is experienced by 1 in 6 couples. Women typically carry a disproportionate share of the psychological burden associated with infertility, experiencing poor quality of life, and 30%-40% experiencing depressive mood or anxiety. Unfortunately, currently available psychological interventions targeting infertility-related distress are associated with modest effects. OBJECTIVE: Our team, in collaboration with patient advisors, has designed a self-help intervention for infertility-related distress involving 7 weekly 10-minute videos addressing the cognitive, behavioral, and interpersonal challenges associated with infertility, delivered through a mobile app. A feasibility study suggests that it is well accepted and highly effective in reducing symptoms of anxiety and depressed mood among distressed individuals dealing with infertility. This study represents the next step in this line of research: a fully powered randomized controlled trial comparing the intervention to a waitlist control group. METHODS: We will recruit 170 individuals struggling to become pregnant in Canada or the United States to be randomized to our 7-week self-help program or a treatment-as-usual condition. The primary outcome will be fertility quality of life, while secondary outcomes will include depressive symptoms, anxious symptoms, and relationship quality, assessed before and after the program as well as biweekly for 16 weeks following completion of the program. Self-reported health care use and the presence of diagnosed mood and anxiety disorders, assessed through a structured psychiatric interview, will also be assessed immediately following the intervention and at the 16-week follow-up assessment. Treatment adherence and retention will also be recorded throughout the intervention. Multilevel modeling will compare the intervention arm to the treatment-as-usual condition in terms of all continuous outcomes across the 9 measurement points. Logistic regression will be used to assess the occurrence of mood and anxiety disorders in the 2 treatment arms at the posttreatment assessment as well as at the 16-week follow-up. Sensitivity analyses will examine potential treatment moderators: membership in the LGBTQIA+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual) communities, baseline fertility quality of life, cultural background, disability status, and pursuit of conception through medical intervention. RESULTS: We expect our intervention to be more effective than treatment-as-usual in improving all mental health parameters assessed and decreasing health care use related to both mental and reproductive health. Effects are expected to be larger with decreasing baseline quality of life and equally effective regardless of membership in the LGBTQIA+ communities, cultural background, or disability status. CONCLUSIONS: If our intervention is successful, this would suggest that it should be scaled up and made publicly available. The availability of this program would fill an important gap in light of the high rates of psychopathology among those experiencing infertility and considering the current lack of effective psychotherapy approaches for infertility. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT06006936; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT06006936. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/52662.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.129 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".