Use of assisted reproductive technology treatment as reported by mothers in comparison with registry data The Upstate KIDS Study
The validity of maternally reported assisted reproductive treatment use is high, with no strong predictors found for discordant reporting, supporting the design of population-based research.
Germaine M. Buck Louis, Ph.D., Charlotte Druschel, M.D., Erin Bell, Ph.D., Judy E. Stern, Ph.D., Barbara Luke, Sc.D., M.P.H., Alexander McLain, Ph.D., Rajeshwari Sundaram, Ph.D., Edwina Yeung, Ph.D.
Volume 103, Issue 6, Pages 1461-1468
To assess the validity of maternally reported assisted reproductive technologies (ART) use and to identify predictors of reporting errors.
A total of 5,034 (27%) mothers enrolled, from whom 4,886 (97%) self-reported information about use of infertility treatment, including ART, for the index birth.
Main Outcome Measure(s):
Four measures of validity (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values) and use of net reclassification improvement (NRI) methods to identify predictors associated with concordant/discordant maternal reporting.
The Upstate New York Infant Development Screening Program (Update KIDS Study) was linked with the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System (SART CORS) using a defined algorithm for 2008–2010. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were high (0.93, 0.99, 0.80, and 1.00, respectively). The validity of maternal report was high, reflecting few differences by participant characteristics except for maternal age dichotomized at 29 years as identified with NRI methods.
Maternally reported ART is valid, with little variation across various characteristics. No strong predictors of discordant reporting were found, supporting the utility of population-based research with SART CORS linkage.