Cited by 127Reproductive Health and TechnologiesDigital Mental Health InterventionsHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility

Online psychoeducational support for infertile women: a randomized controlled trial

Open access
Cousineau, T. M., Green, T. C., Corsini, E., Seibring, A, Showstack, M. T., Applegarth, L., Davidson, M., Perloe, M.·2008·Human Reproduction

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The study goal was to develop and test the effectiveness of a brief online education and support program for female infertility patients. METHODS: A randomized-controlled trial was conducted. Using a Solomon-four group design, 190 female patients were recruited from three US fertility centers and were randomized into two experimental and two no-treatment control groups. The psychological outcomes assessed included infertility distress, infertility self-efficacy, decisional conflict, marital cohesion and coping style. Program dosage and satisfaction were also assessed at four weeks follow-up. RESULTS: Women exposed to the online program significantly improved in the area of social concerns (P = 0.038) related to infertility distress, and felt more informed about a medical decision with which they were contending (P = 0.037). Trends were observed for decreased global stress(P = 0.10), sexual concerns (P = 0.059), distress related to child-free living (P = 0.063), increased infertility self-efficacy (P = 0.067) and decision making clarity (P = 0.079). A dosage response was observed in the experimental groups for women who spent >60 min online for decreased global stress (P = 0.028) and increased self efficacy (P = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: This evidence-based eHealth program for women experiencing infertility suggests that a web-based patient education intervention can have beneficial effects in several psychological domains and may be a cost effective resource for fertility practices.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/humrep/dem306

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Time spent online was not correlated to outcomes in studies that targeted depression and anxiety, but was correlated to outcomes in studies of infertility related distress and body dissatisfaction.

    “Time spent online was not correlated to outcomes in studies that targeted depression [58] and anxiety [59], but was correlated to outcomes in studies of infertility related distress [60] and body dissatisfaction [61].”
  • Several studies categorized participants into adherent or not, or usage categories such as low, medium, and high, while others used continuous variables or a combination of these.

    “Several studies categorized participants into adherent or not [49,54,57,75], or usage categories such as low, medium, and high [60], while others used continuous variables [23,24,33-36,38-41,43-45,50-52,55,56,58,59,61,76] or a combination of these [42,46,53,64-66,77].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Butler SF, Budman SH, Beardslee WR. Risk reduction in children from families with parental depression: a videotape psychoeducation program. National Academies of Practice Forum: Issues in Interdisciplinary Care 2000;2:267-276.
  2. Butler SF, Chiauzzi E, Bromberg JI, Budman SH, Buono DP. Computer-assisted screening for alcohol problems in primary care. J Tech Hum Serv 2003;21:1-19.
  3. Newton CR, Sherrard W, Glavac I. The Fertility Problem Inventory: measuring perceived infertility distress. Fertil Steril 1999;72:54-62.
  4. Sawilowsky SS, Markman BS. Rejoinder to Braver and Braver. Perceptual and Motor Skills 1990d;71:424-426.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cousineau, T. M., Green, T. C., Corsini, E., Seibring, A., Showstack, M. T., Applegarth, L., Davidson, M., & Perloe, M.
Affiliations
  • Inflexxion (United States) (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Boston IVF (US)
  • University of Massachusetts Boston (US)
  • NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital (US)
  • Fertility Centers of Illinois (US)
Venue
Human Reproduction
Published
2008-03-01
Volume
23
Issue
3
Pages
554-566
ISSN
  • 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2350
OpenAlex
W2075912479
Cited by
127
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
6.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Human Reproduction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R44HD039066, R44HD39066-02)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
Keywords
female infertility, online psychoeducation, online intervention, decisional conflict, marital cohesion, coping styles, e-health, patient education, psychological outcomes
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Health Promotion, Humans, Infertility, Female, Online Systems, Patient Education as Topic, Social Support, Internet

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review