4.7 Article

Improving Reporting of Clinical Studies Using the POSEIDON Criteria: POSORT Guidelines

Journal

FRONTIERS IN ENDOCRINOLOGY
Volume 12, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2021.587051

Keywords

Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number (POSEIDON) criteria; ovarian stimulation; low prognosis; poor response; infertility; assisted reproductive technology; ART calculator; guidelines

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The POSEIDON criteria were developed to help identify low-prognosis patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology and guide therapeutic strategies. However, existing evidence shows inconsistent and incomplete reporting, prompting the development of guidelines to improve reporting quality. The ultimate goal is to advance knowledge on the clinical use of POSEIDON criteria for the benefit of patients, clinicians, and the infertility community.
The POSEIDON (Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number) criteria were developed to help clinicians identify and classify low-prognosis patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) and provide guidance for possible therapeutic strategies to overcome infertility. Since its introduction, the number of published studies using the POSEIDON criteria has increased steadily. However, a critical analysis of existing evidence indicates inconsistent and incomplete reporting of critical outcomes. Therefore, we developed guidelines to help researchers improve the quality of reporting in studies applying the POSEIDON criteria. We also discuss the advantages of using the POSEIDON criteria in ART clinical studies and elaborate on possible study designs and critical endpoints. Our ultimate goal is to advance the knowledge concerning the clinical use of the POSEIDON criteria to patients, clinicians, and the infertility community.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available