Cargando…

The crossover design for studies of infertility employing in-vitro fertilization: A methodological survey

BACKGROUND: Infertility has become increasingly common worldwide. There is a need for the infertility literature to evaluate new interventions with IVF. The crossover design presents many methodological advantages for IVF trials. In addition to providing a within-person comparison of outcomes, it of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Budhram, Dalton R., Shi, Daniel, McDonald, Sarah D., Walter, Stephen D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6734149/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31517133
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2019.100426
_version_ 1783450091495882752
author Budhram, Dalton R.
Shi, Daniel
McDonald, Sarah D.
Walter, Stephen D.
author_facet Budhram, Dalton R.
Shi, Daniel
McDonald, Sarah D.
Walter, Stephen D.
author_sort Budhram, Dalton R.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Infertility has become increasingly common worldwide. There is a need for the infertility literature to evaluate new interventions with IVF. The crossover design presents many methodological advantages for IVF trials. In addition to providing a within-person comparison of outcomes, it offers participants the opportunity to potentially benefit from more than one available treatment. However, infertility studies present a unique challenge in terms of bias: successful participants do not cross over to the second treatment group. OBJECTIVES: The main objective of our study was to survey the methodological features of crossover trials for infertility with in-vitro fertilization (IVF) based interventions. A secondary focus was reporting key results. STUDY DESIGN & SETTING: We conducted a methodological survey by systematically searching Medline and Embase databases. The capture-recapture technique was used to estimate the number of relevant studies that were not retrieved by our search strategy. We employed the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess methodological rigour. Crossover-specific methods features were summarized. Treatment effects for pregnancy outcomes across studies are also presented. RESULTS: 15 studies met inclusion criteria. Most studies were deemed to have high or unclear risks of bias, usually because of incomplete reporting of outcome data and assessment procedures. 13 studies did not employ crossover-specific methods to analyze outcome data by period, which may bias treatment effect estimates. Four studies reported pregnancy outcome data with sample sizes from both treatment periods. Of these four studies, three reported that the control intervention was favoured. CONCLUSIONS: The main limitation of our survey was the small sample size of studies. Future reviews should be larger and seek to encompass a broader range of the infertility literature. Despite the issues identified in the included trials, consideration should still be given to using the crossover design in future infertility research. Employing crossover-specific analysis methods, such as accounting for participant non-completion, along with strict adherence to CONSORT reporting guidelines, may significantly reduce the risk of bias in individual studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6734149
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67341492019-09-12 The crossover design for studies of infertility employing in-vitro fertilization: A methodological survey Budhram, Dalton R. Shi, Daniel McDonald, Sarah D. Walter, Stephen D. Contemp Clin Trials Commun Article BACKGROUND: Infertility has become increasingly common worldwide. There is a need for the infertility literature to evaluate new interventions with IVF. The crossover design presents many methodological advantages for IVF trials. In addition to providing a within-person comparison of outcomes, it offers participants the opportunity to potentially benefit from more than one available treatment. However, infertility studies present a unique challenge in terms of bias: successful participants do not cross over to the second treatment group. OBJECTIVES: The main objective of our study was to survey the methodological features of crossover trials for infertility with in-vitro fertilization (IVF) based interventions. A secondary focus was reporting key results. STUDY DESIGN & SETTING: We conducted a methodological survey by systematically searching Medline and Embase databases. The capture-recapture technique was used to estimate the number of relevant studies that were not retrieved by our search strategy. We employed the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess methodological rigour. Crossover-specific methods features were summarized. Treatment effects for pregnancy outcomes across studies are also presented. RESULTS: 15 studies met inclusion criteria. Most studies were deemed to have high or unclear risks of bias, usually because of incomplete reporting of outcome data and assessment procedures. 13 studies did not employ crossover-specific methods to analyze outcome data by period, which may bias treatment effect estimates. Four studies reported pregnancy outcome data with sample sizes from both treatment periods. Of these four studies, three reported that the control intervention was favoured. CONCLUSIONS: The main limitation of our survey was the small sample size of studies. Future reviews should be larger and seek to encompass a broader range of the infertility literature. Despite the issues identified in the included trials, consideration should still be given to using the crossover design in future infertility research. Employing crossover-specific analysis methods, such as accounting for participant non-completion, along with strict adherence to CONSORT reporting guidelines, may significantly reduce the risk of bias in individual studies. Elsevier 2019-08-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6734149/ /pubmed/31517133 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2019.100426 Text en © 2019 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Budhram, Dalton R.
Shi, Daniel
McDonald, Sarah D.
Walter, Stephen D.
The crossover design for studies of infertility employing in-vitro fertilization: A methodological survey
title The crossover design for studies of infertility employing in-vitro fertilization: A methodological survey
title_full The crossover design for studies of infertility employing in-vitro fertilization: A methodological survey
title_fullStr The crossover design for studies of infertility employing in-vitro fertilization: A methodological survey
title_full_unstemmed The crossover design for studies of infertility employing in-vitro fertilization: A methodological survey
title_short The crossover design for studies of infertility employing in-vitro fertilization: A methodological survey
title_sort crossover design for studies of infertility employing in-vitro fertilization: a methodological survey
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6734149/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31517133
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2019.100426
work_keys_str_mv AT budhramdaltonr thecrossoverdesignforstudiesofinfertilityemployinginvitrofertilizationamethodologicalsurvey
AT shidaniel thecrossoverdesignforstudiesofinfertilityemployinginvitrofertilizationamethodologicalsurvey
AT mcdonaldsarahd thecrossoverdesignforstudiesofinfertilityemployinginvitrofertilizationamethodologicalsurvey
AT walterstephend thecrossoverdesignforstudiesofinfertilityemployinginvitrofertilizationamethodologicalsurvey
AT budhramdaltonr crossoverdesignforstudiesofinfertilityemployinginvitrofertilizationamethodologicalsurvey
AT shidaniel crossoverdesignforstudiesofinfertilityemployinginvitrofertilizationamethodologicalsurvey
AT mcdonaldsarahd crossoverdesignforstudiesofinfertilityemployinginvitrofertilizationamethodologicalsurvey
AT walterstephend crossoverdesignforstudiesofinfertilityemployinginvitrofertilizationamethodologicalsurvey