{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.034358638743455495, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0206151832460733, 'mean_word_length': 5.200811359026369, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 4, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 2, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Efficacy of psychological interventions for mental health and pregnancy rates among individuals with infertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND
Depression and anxiety are highly prevalent among individuals struggling with infertility. Thus, numerous psychological interventions have been adapted to infertility, with the aim of relieving distress as well as increasing pregnancy rates.


OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of psychological interventions on infertility-related distress and pregnancy rates among individuals and/or couples with infertility and to analyse their overall effect. It also sought to examine potential treatment moderators, including intervention length, format and therapeutic approach.


SEARCH METHODS
An electronic search of 11 databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, was performed for studies published until January 2022. The inclusion criteria were RCTs conducted on humans and published in English. Psychological outcomes of interest included anxiety, depression, infertility-related distress, wellbeing and marital satisfaction. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess study quality, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to assess the overall quality of the research evidence.


OUTCOMES
There were 58 RCTs in total, including 54 which included psychological outcomes and 21 which assessed pregnancy rates. Studies originated from all regions of the world, but nearly half of the studies were from the Middle East. Although a beneficial effect on combined psychological outcomes was found (Hedge's g = 0.82, P < 0.0001), it was moderated by region (P < 0.00001) such that studies from the Middle East exhibited large effects (g = 1.40, P < 0.0001), while the effects were small among studies conducted elsewhere (g = 0.23, P < 0.0001). Statistically adjusting for study region in a meta-regression, neither intervention length, therapeutic approach, therapy format, nor participant gender (P > 0.05) moderated the effect of treatment. A beneficial treatment effect on pregnancy (RR (95% CI) = 1.25 (1.07-1.47), P = 0.005) was not moderated by region, treatment length, approach or format (P > 0.05). Largely due to the lack of high quality RCTs, the quality of the available evidence was rated as low to moderate.


WIDER IMPLICATIONS
This is the first meta-analysis of RCTs testing the effect of psychological interventions on infertility-related distress and pregnancy rates. These findings suggest that in most regions of the world, psychological interventions are associated with small reductions in distress and modest effects on conception, suggesting the need for more effective interventions. These findings must be considered in light of the fact that the majority of the included RCTs were deemed to be at high risk of bias. Rigorously conducted trials are needed.