Childless Canadian men's and women's childbearing intentions, attitudes towards and willingness to use assisted human reproduction
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
STUDY QUESTION: What are the childbearing intentions of currently childless men and women? What is their attitude towards, and willingness to use, assisted human reproduction (AHR) treatments and family-building options should they be faced with fertility challenges in the future? SUMMARY ANSWER: Men and women expect to become parents significantly later in life than they believe is ideal. If faced with future fertility challenges, respondents were open to using IVF, but were not positively predisposed to third-party family-building options. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Delayed childbearing is an increasing worldwide phenomenon that has considerable health and fertility-related implications. Research to date has focused primarily on women, and indicates a lack of knowledge about the fertility life span and the limitations of AHR in fully compensating for age-related fertility declines. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Cross-sectional study of 2000 childless women and 599 childless men, conducted between April 2010 and May 2011. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: A total of 2599 childless, presumed fertile individuals between the ages of 20 and 50 years. An online questionnaire assessed fertility beliefs and intentions and willingness to use AHR. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The findings indicate that men and women expect to become parents significantly later in life than they believe is ideal. If faced with fertility challenges in the future, both men and women were open to using IVF. Men were significantly more willing to consider using donated eggs and embryos, gestational surrogacy and fertility preservation. Women were significantly more willing to consider using home fertility testing, IVF, ICSI and donor sperm. Overall, the childless respondents were not positively predisposed to third party-family-building options. LIMITATIONS: The geographic specificity of the sample, the online format and recruitment methods may limit the generalizability of these findings. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Given the worldwide trend towards delayed childbearing, and the widespread availability of AHR, it is likely that these findings could extend to the wider North American, European and Australasia populations of English- and French-speaking childless men and women. However, it should be noted that international differences exist, especially concerning regulations governing the funding of AHR and payment for gametes and surrogacy. It is significant that women and men in this study indicated a lack of willingness to consider the use of third third-party treatments--the very options they may need to use in building their families, if the increasing trend towards delayed childbearing continues. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This research was funded by a grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Assisted Human Reproduction Canada #PAH-103594, 2009/10. No competing interests.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».