ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2025
ESHRE's key research priorities in infertility: maximizing impact on science, people and society†.
Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychosocial Aspects of Infertility and Medically Assisted Reproduction in Serbia: A COMPI-Based Single Centre Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Men's perceptions of fertility-related health risks: implications for clinical communication and data-driven research.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Men's perceptions of long-term health outcomes following fertility problems: a UK-based mixed-methods survey.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
study questionWhich research topics in the area of infertility should be prioritized in the allocation of research resources? SUMMARY ANSWER: Twelve research priorities were formulated, spanning the following areas: preventing infertility and preserving fertility, gynaecological diseases, male infertility, optimizing fertility treatments, optimizing psychosocial support and deepening knowledge on preimplantation development and early pregnancy. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Many research gaps related to infertility and its management remain understudied and underfunded, making it important to set priorities to ensure appropriate allocation of research resources. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) appointed a multidisciplinary working group, including a patient representative, to develop a list of research priorities related to infertility, which are relevant to researchers and institutions that fund research. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,
methodsA list of research topics was collated based on the recommendations for future research formulated in ESHRE's evidence-based guidelines and suggestions submitted by ESHRE's Special Interest Groups as call topics for the ESHRE research grants. A scoring tool was developed to assess the expected impact of research on each topic on individuals, society and scientific advancement. Topics were scored independently by the working group members and the 12 topics with the highest scores were selected for presentation in this paper. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Using our newly developed scoring tool, we have identified 12 research priorities that broadly fall under six areas. These are preventing infertility and preserving fertility, gynaecological diseases, male infertility, optimizing fertility treatments (two priorities per area selected), optimizing psychosocial support (one priority selected) and deepening knowledge on preimplantation development and early pregnancy (three priorities selected). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The impact scoring tool would benefit from further testing and refinement in future projects. The scoring of some impact indicators is heavily based on the judgment and expertise of the scorers, which was accounted for by ensuring representation of knowledge and experience from all relevant disciplines and subject areas as well as the patient perspective within the working group. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
findingsThis paper may serve to stimulate further thought and discussion within the infertility research community on the potential impact of proposed and ongoing research. It will furthermore inform and encourage policy makers involved in research funding allocation and contribute to a more efficient and purposeful allocation of research resources towards infertility research. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The technical support for this project was provided by ESHRE. A.C. reports employment at Juno Genetics. Y.C. reports a grant from Guerbet and honoraria from Ferring, Merck, Abbot, Nordic Pharma and Organon. G.C. reports consulting fees from Gedeon Richter and honoraria from Cooper Surgical. S.G. reports the development of www.myjourney.pt licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 licence. J.K.-B. reports grants from the NIHR Evaluation and Studies Coordinating Centre, the Gates Foundation, the Economic and Social Research Council, BAYER Consumer Health and MRC Confidence in Concept; honoraria from Ferring and Cooper Surgical; travel support from Ferring, Cooper Surgical, Congressworks LLP, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Andrologie e. V., BAYER, University of Munster and ESHRE; a patent for microchannel sperm cell preparation; and a leadership or fiduciary role in the Association of Clinical and Reproductive Scientists. A.P. reports grants (to her institution) and consulting fees from Gedeon Richter, Ferring, Merck A/S and Cryos; honoraria from Gedeon Richter, Ferring, Merck A/S and Organon; and travel support (to her institution) from Gedeon Richter. H.S.N. reports grants from Freya Biosciences ApS, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, BioInnovation Institute, Ministry of Education, Novo Nordic Foundation, Augustinus Fonden, Oda og Hans Svenningsens Fond, Demant Fonden, Ole Kirks Fond and the Independent Research Fund Denmark; speaker's fees from Ferring, Merck A/S, Astra Zeneca, Cook Medical, Gedeon Richter, Ibsa Nordic, Novo Nordisk A/S; co-development of an app with the Maternity Foundation; and co-founding a project with Lulu Health. The remaining authors (J.T., A.A., I.D., C.F., M.G., A.S.L., M.M.-R., V.N., A.O., N.R., M.S.-L., P.T., N.V., S.V. and K.S.) have nothing to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.