Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) test information on Australian and New Zealand fertility clinic websites: A content analysis

Tessa Copp, Brooke Nickel, Sarah Lensen, Karin Hammarberg, Devora Lieberman, Jenny Doust, Ben W. Mol, Kirsten McCaffery

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Objectives The anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) test has been promoted as a way to inform women about their future fertility. However, data consistently show the test is a poor predictor of natural fertility potential for an individual woman. As fertility centre websites are often a primary source of information for reproductive information, it is essential the information provided is accurate and reflects the available evidence. We aimed to systematically record and categorise information about the AMH test found on Australian and New Zealand fertility clinic websites. Design Content analysis of online written information about the AMH test on fertility clinic websites. Setting Accredited Australian and New Zealand fertility clinic websites. Methods Data were extracted between April and June 2020. Any webpage that mentioned the AMH test, including blogs specifically about the AMH test posted since 2015, was analysed and the content categorised. Results Of the 39 active accredited fertility clinics' websites, 25 included information about the AMH test. The amount of information varied widely, and embodied four overarching categories; (1) the utility of the AMH test, (2) who the test is suitable for, (3) possible actions in response to the test and (4) caveats and limitations of the test. Eight specific statements about the utility of the test were identified, many of which are not evidence-based. While some websites were transparent regarding the test's limitations, others mentioned no caveats or included persuasive statements actively promoting the test as empowering for a range of women in different circumstances. Conclusions Several websites had statements about the utility of the AMH test that are not supported by the evidence. This highlights the need for higher standards for information provided on fertility clinic websites to prevent women being misled to believe the test can reliably predict their fertility.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere046927
Number of pages8
JournalBMJ Open
Volume11
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 Jul 2021

Keywords

  • general medicine (see internal medicine)
  • quality in healthcare
  • reproductive medicine

Cite this