Is the use of IVF add-on treatments driven by patients or clinics? Findings from a UK patient survey-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Is the use of IVF add-on treatments driven by patients or clinics? Findings from a UK patient survey

Published:2023-03-15 Issue:2 Volume:26 Page:365-372
ISSN:1464-7273
Container-title:Human Fertility
language:en
Short-container-title:Human Fertility

Author:

Cirkovic Stevan¹²,Wilkinson Jack³^ORCID,Lensen Sarah⁴^ORCID,Jackson Emily¹^ORCID,Harper Joyce⁵^ORCID,Lindemann Katy⁶,Costa-Font Joan⁷^ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Law School, London School for Economics and Political Science (LSE), London, UK

2. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), London, UK

3. Centre for Biostatistics, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Royal Women’s Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

5. Institute of Women’s Health, University College London (UCL), London, UK

6. Uber Barrens Club (patient advocate), London, UK

7. Department of Health Policy and Ageing and Health Incentives Lab (AHIL), London School for Economics and Political Science (LSE), London, UK

Publisher

Informa UK Limited

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynecology,Reproductive Medicine,General Medicine

Link

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14647273.2023.2197628

Reference25 articles.

1. Add-ons in the laboratory: hopeful, but not always helpful

2. Repeated implantation failure (RIF): an iatrogenic meaningless definition that generates unnecessary and costly use of add-on procedures

3. Medical Futility

4. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies world report: assisted reproductive technology, 2014

5. CMA. (2021). Guidance for fertility clinics on consumer law: Helping fertility clinics comply with their consumer law obligations. Competition & Markets Authority.