Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 263

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The patients' perspective on fertility care: a systematic review

Dancet, E. A. F., Nelen, W. L. D. M., Sermeus, W., De Leeuw, L., Kremer, J. A. M., D'Hooghe, T. M.·2010·Human Reproduction Update

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered reproductive medicine (PCRM) is important for quality of care, and this is increasingly being recognized. However, its scientific basis is unclear. The main research questions addressed in this review are: 'How has the patients' perspective on fertility care been examined (method and quality)?' and 'What is the perspective of patients in developed countries on fertility care?'. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted and inclusion criteria with respect to eligibility and quality were applied. The methodology of the studies was critically appraised; the findings of the studies were synthesized and organized according to: patients' value clarification and assessment of service quality and dimensions of patient-centeredness. Additionally data on patient preferences and determinants of patients' perspective on care were collected. RESULTS: In 51 selected studies, patients' perspective on fertility care was examined with (few or many item) questionnaires and/or qualitative interviews. Significant methodological problems were observed. Fertility patients attached importance to seven out of eight dimensions of patient-centeredness (Picker institute) and two new dimensions 'fertility clinic staff' and 'skills' were developed. Overall, fertility patients want to be treated like human beings with a need for: medical skills, respect, coordination, accessibility, information, comfort, support, partner involvement and a good attitude of and relationship with fertility clinic staff. Patients' preferences between procedures and demographic, medical and psychological determinants of their perspective were defined. CONCLUSIONS: Fertility patients have 'human needs' besides their need for medical care. Evidence on PCRM is available but significant methodological limitations call for the development and validation of a European questionnaire.

Overview

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/humupd/dmq004

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 263

Metadata

Authors
Dancet, E. A. F., Nelen, W. L. D. M., Sermeus, W., De Leeuw, L., Kremer, J. A. M., & D'Hooghe, T. M.
Venue
Human Reproduction Update
Published
2010-03-11
Volume
16
Issue
5
Pages
467-487
ISSN
  • 1355-4786 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2369
OpenAlex
W2130975929
Cited by
263
References
3
FWCI
2.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The patients' perspective on fertility care: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/humupd/dmq004
The paper
Dancet, E. A. F., Nelen, W. L. D. M., Sermeus, W., De Leeuw, L., Kremer, J. A. M., & D'Hooghe, T. M. (2010). The patients' perspective on fertility care: a systematic review. Human Reproduction Update. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq004

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.