Literature DB >> 23184181

Fertility knowledge and beliefs about fertility treatment: findings from the International Fertility Decision-making Study.

Laura Bunting1, Ivan Tsibulsky, Jacky Boivin.   

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION: How good is fertility knowledge and what are treatment beliefs in an international sample of men and women currently trying to conceive? SUMMARY ANSWER: The study population had a modest level of fertility knowledge and held positive and negative views of treatment. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Few studies have examined general fertility treatment attitudes but studies of specific interventions show that attitudes are related to characteristics of the patient, doctor and context. Further, research shows that fertility knowledge is poor. However, the majority of these studies have examined the prevalence of infertility, the optimal fertile period and/or age-related infertility in women, in university students and/or people from high-resource countries making it difficult to generalize findings. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A cross-sectional sample completed the International Fertility Decision-making Study (IFDMS) over a 9-month period, online or via social research panels and in fertility clinics. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,
METHODS: Participants were 10 045 people (8355 women, 1690 men) who were on average 31.8 years old, had been trying to conceive for 2.8 years with 53.9% university educated. From a total of 79 countries, sample size was >100 in 18 countries. All 79 countries were assigned to either a very high Human Development Index (VH HDI) or a not very high HDI (NVH HDI). The IFDMS was a 45-min, 64-item English survey translated into 12 languages. The inclusion criteria were the age between 18 and 50 years and currently trying to conceive for at least 6 months. Fertility knowledge was assessed using a 13-item correct/incorrect scale concerned with risk factors, misconceptions and basic fertility facts (range: 0-100% correct). Treatment beliefs were assessed with positive and negative statements about fertility treatment rated on a five-point agree/disagree response scale. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Average correct score for Fertility Knowledge was 56.9%, with greater knowledge significantly related to female gender, university education, paid employment, VH HDI and prior medical consultation for infertility (all P < 0.001). The mean agreement scores for treatment beliefs showed that agreement for positive items (safety, efficacy) was correlated with agreement for negative items (short/long-term physical/emotional effects) (P > 0.001). People who had given birth/fathered a child, been trying to conceive for less than 12 months, who had never consulted for a fertility problem and who lived in a country with an NVH HDI agreed less with negative beliefs. HDI, duration of trying to conceive and help-seeking were also correlates of higher positive beliefs, alongside younger age, living in an urban area and having stepchildren. Greater fertility knowledge was associated with stronger agreement on negative treatment beliefs items (P < 0.001) but was unrelated to positive treatment beliefs items. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: There was volunteer bias insofar as more women, people of higher education and people with fertility problems (i.e. met criteria for infertility, had consulted a medical doctor, had conceived with fertility treatment) participated and this was true in VH and NVH HDI countries. The bias may mean that people in this sample had better fertility knowledge and less favourable treatment beliefs than is the case in the general population. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
FINDINGS: Educational interventions should be directed at improving knowledge of fertility health. Future prospective research should be aimed at investigating how fertility knowledge and treatment beliefs affect childbearing and help-seeking decision-making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23184181     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/des402

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  52 in total

1.  First contact: the intersection of demographics, knowledge, and appraisal of treatment at the initial infertility visit.

Authors:  Krista J Childress; Angela K Lawson; Marissa S Ghant; Gricelda Mendoza; Eden R Cardozo; Edmond Confino; Erica E Marsh
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2015-05-21       Impact factor: 7.329

2.  Exploring Infertility from the Cultural Context of Latino College Students: Results from a Preliminary Focus Group.

Authors:  Jean Marie S Place; McKenna Bireley
Journal:  J Racial Ethn Health Disparities       Date:  2016-09-01

3.  Men's knowledge of their own fertility: a population-based survey examining the awareness of factors that are associated with male infertility.

Authors:  D Daumler; P Chan; K C Lo; J Takefman; P Zelkowitz
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2016-11-05       Impact factor: 6.918

4.  Counseling patients on reproductive aging and elective fertility preservation-a survey of obstetricians and gynecologists' experience, approach, and knowledge.

Authors:  Rani Fritz; Susan Klugman; Harry Lieman; Jay Schulkin; Laura Taouk; Neko Castleberry; Erkan Buyuk
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-08-02       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  Fertility awareness online: the efficacy of a fertility education website in increasing knowledge and changing fertility beliefs.

Authors:  J C Daniluk; E Koert
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 6.918

6.  Expert consensus for primary management of reproductive health: a Delphi study.

Authors:  Andrea Bernabeu; Concepcion Carratala-Munuera; Jose A Quesada; Joaquin Llacer; Adriana Lopez-Pineda; Francisco Sellers; Vicente F Gil-Guillen; Rafael Bernabeu; Kamila Cheikh-Moussa; Domingo Orozco-Beltran
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 1.568

7.  Awareness, knowledge, and perceptions of infertility, fertility assessment, and assisted reproductive technologies in the era of oocyte freezing among female and male university students.

Authors:  C Meissner; C Schippert; Frauke von Versen-Höynck
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-04-28       Impact factor: 3.412

8.  A cross sectional study on fertility knowledge in Japan, measured with the Japanese version of Cardiff Fertility Knowledge Scale (CFKS-J).

Authors:  Eri Maeda; Hiroki Sugimori; Fumiaki Nakamura; Yasuki Kobayashi; Joseph Green; Machi Suka; Masako Okamoto; Jacky Boivin; Hidekazu Saito
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2015-01-31       Impact factor: 3.223

9.  Effects of fertility education on knowledge, desires and anxiety among the reproductive-aged population: findings from a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  E Maeda; F Nakamura; Y Kobayashi; J Boivin; H Sugimori; K Murata; H Saito
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2016-06-14       Impact factor: 6.918

10.  A qualitative study of Ottawa university students' awareness, knowledge and perceptions of infertility, infertility risk factors and assisted reproductive technologies (ART).

Authors:  Kelley-Anne Sabarre; Zainab Khan; Amanda N Whitten; Olivia Remes; Karen P Phillips
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2013-08-20       Impact factor: 3.223

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.