No abstract

BackgroundInfertility all around the world and in every culture is recognized as a stressful and critical experience that threatens individual, familial, marital, and social stability. Thus, in accordance with the importance of a woman’s mental health and the possible impact of mental health on treatment outcome, finding a way to deal with perceived stress in women can help improve pregnancy outcomes.MethodsThis study is a systematic review on reducing perceived infertility stress in infertile women. The current study was undertaken using multiple databases such as SID, Irandoc, Magi ran, Google Scholar, PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, Cochrane library, and CINAHL selected from articles pertinent to the study. The selection of papers was undertaken from 1990 through May 2016. The methodological quality was assessed.ResultsThe initial search yielded a list of 725 papers, and then reviewers studied titles and abstracts. Thereafter, 68 papers were incorporated, and researchers reviewed summaries of all of the searched articles. Finally, the researchers utilized the data gained from 29 full articles so as to compile this review paper. Reviewing the studies conducted on reducing infertility perceived stress, the researchers classified related findings into two main categories: supportive and counseling intervention.ConclusionConsidering the fact that there is an international agreement that fertility centers need to offer counseling programs for psychological problems of the infertile, it is especially important to recognize counseling-supportive interventions for decreasing infertile women’s perceived stress and to program plans for decreasing women’s perceived stress. By investigating counseling-supportive stress, we hope that this study has stepped forward toward health care agent’s familiarity with decreasing infertile women’s perceived stress and, therefore, improving treatment consequences.

The benchmark dose (BMD) approach is increasingly used as a preferred approach for doseeffect analysis, but standard experimental designs are generally not optimized for BMD analysis. The aim of this study was to evaluate how the use of unequally sized dose groups affects the quality of BMD estimates in toxicity testing, with special consideration of the total burden of animal distress. We generated continuous dose-effect data by Monte Carlo simulation using two dose-effect curves based on endpoints with different shape parameters. Eighty-five designs, each with four dose groups of unequal size, were examined in scenarios ranging from low-to high-dose placements and with a total number of animals set to 40, 80, or 200. For each simulation, a BMD value was estimated and compared with the "true" BMD. In general, redistribution of animals from higher to lower dose groups resulted in an improved precision of the calculated BMD value as long as dose placements were high enough to detect a significant trend in the dose-effect data with sufficient power. The improved BMD precision and the associated reduction of the number of animals exposed to the highest dose, where chemically induced distress is most likely to occur, are favorable for the reduction and refinement principles. The result thereby strengthen BMD-aligned design of experiments as a means for more accurate hazard characterization along with animal welfare improvements.

Increasingly, dose-response data are being evaluated with the benchmark dose (BMD) approach rather than by the less precise no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) approach. However, the basis for designing animal experiments, using equally sized dose groups, is still primed for the NOAEL approach. The major objective here was to assess the impact of using dose groups of unequal size on both the quality of the BMD and overall animal distress. We examined study designs with a total number of 200 animals distributed in four dose groups employing quantal data generated by Monte Carlo simulations. Placing more animals at doses close to the targeted BMD provided an estimate of BMD that was slightly better than the standard design with equally sized dose groups. In situations involving a clear dose-response, this translates into fewer animals receiving high doses and thus less overall animal distress. Accordingly, in connection with risk and safety assessment, animal distress can potentially be reduced by distributing the animals appropriately between dose groups without decreasing the quality of the information obtained.

No abstract