ArticleInternational journal of reproductive biomedicine2025
Presenting a conceptual model for decision support systems in infertility: A developmental study.
Article in International journal of reproductive biomedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Infertility is the inability to conceive after a year of trying, resulting in unintentional childlessness. A clinical decision-support system can enhance diagnosis, reduce costs, improve access, and increase treatment accuracy. Objective: This study aimed to present a conceptual model for decision support systems in infertility. Materials and Methods: This developmental study, conducted from April-November 2024 in 3 steps. First, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were investigated to identify data for decision support systems in infertility. Next, search engines like Google, Yahoo, and Bing, along with artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity, helped identify similar systems. Lastly, opinions from 32 infertility experts were collected via a researcher-made questionnaire, with reliability confirmed by Cronbach's alpha of 0.78 and validity confirmed by content validity ratio of 0.60. Results: In the first step, 16,310 articles were identified; 10 were selected after removing duplicates and applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. In the second step, 71 relevant systems were identified in search engines; 58 were excluded, leaving 13 for further analysis. In the third step, a researcher-designed questionnaire was distributed to 32 experts, yielding key agreement rates of 94% for monitoring and follow-up, 94% for sperm analysis data, 90% for abortion data, and 82.5% for infertility information from health magazines. Requirements grouped into 4 categories: main features (10 elements), patient info management (19 elements), fertility prediction data (16 elements), and secondary features (3 elements). The model's overall agreement was 85%. Conclusion: Developing a decision-support system for infertility could enhance clinical care and outcomes; however, challenges include standardizing validation methods and considering ethnic diversity.
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.