TY - JOUR
T1 - Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) test information on Australian and New Zealand fertility clinic websites
T2 - A content analysis
AU - Copp, Tessa
AU - Nickel, Brooke
AU - Lensen, Sarah
AU - Hammarberg, Karin
AU - Lieberman, Devora
AU - Doust, Jenny
AU - Mol, Ben W.
AU - McCaffery, Kirsten
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding This project was supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Programme grant (APP1113532).
Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/7/7
Y1 - 2021/7/7
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - general medicine (see internal medicine)
KW - quality in healthcare
KW - reproductive medicine
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85109539519&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046927
DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046927
M3 - Article
C2 - 34233986
AN - SCOPUS:85109539519
SN - 2044-6055
VL - 11
JO - BMJ Open
JF - BMJ Open
IS - 7
M1 - e046927
ER -