Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29788136›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2018

An experimental evaluation of the benefits and costs of providing fertility information to adolescents and emerging adults.

J Boivin, E Koert, T Harris, L O'Shea, A Perryman, K Parker, C Harrison

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Elective Egg Freezing for Non-Medical Reasons (Scientific Impact Paper No. 63, 2026 Second Edition).BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Knowledge about the impact of age on fertility: a brief review.Upsala journal of medical sciences · 2020
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

J BoivinSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, Tower Building, Park Place, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
E KoertSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, Tower Building, Park Place, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
T HarrisSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, Tower Building, Park Place, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
L O'SheaSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, Tower Building, Park Place, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
A PerrymanSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, Tower Building, Park Place, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
K ParkerSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, Tower Building, Park Place, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
C HarrisonSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, Tower Building, Park Place, Cardiff, Wales, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionDoes the provision of fertility (compared to control) information affect fertility-related knowledge, perceived threat of infertility, anxiety, physical stress and fertility plans in adolescents and emerging adults? SUMMARY ANSWER: The provision of fertility information was associated with increased fertility knowledge (emerging adults) and greater infertility threat (adolescents and emerging adults). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: According to fertility education research, adolescents and emerging adults know less than they should know about fertility topics. Fertility knowledge can be improved through the provision of information in older adults. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Experimental design. Secondary and university students completed pre-information questionnaires, were randomly assigned via computer to an experimental group, read either fertility (FertiEduc group) or healthy pregnancy information (Control group), and completed post-information questionnaires. Data were collected in group sessions via an online portal. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,

methodsEligible participants were aged 16-18 (adolescents) or 21-24 years (emerging adults), childless, not currently pregnant (for men, partner not pregnant) or trying to conceive, presumed fertile and intending to have a child in the future. Of the 255 invited, 208 (n = 93 adolescents, n = 115 emerging adults) participated. The FertiEduc group received 'A Guide to Fertility', four online pages of information about fertility topics (e.g. 'When are men and women most fertile?') and the Control group received four online pages from the National Health Service (NHS) pregnancy booklet 'Baby Bump and Beyond'. Participants completed a questionnaire (fertility knowledge, perceived threat of infertility, anxiety, physical stress and fertility plans, moderators) prior to and after the provision of information. Mixed factorial analysis of variance was used to examine the effects of information provision and hierarchical multiple regression to assess potential moderators of knowledge. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The FertiEduc and Control groups were equivalent on age, gender, disability, relationship status and orientation at baseline. Results showed that fertility information significantly increased fertility knowledge for emerging adults only (P < 0.001) and threat of infertility for emerging adults and adolescents (P = 0.05). The moderators were not significant. Participation in the study was associated with an increase in feelings of anxiety but a decrease in physical stress reactions. Adolescents had more optimal fertility plans compared to emerging adults due to being younger. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This was an experimental study on a self-selected sample of men and women from selected educational institutions and only short term effects of information were studied. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsProvision of fertility information can have benefits (increased fertility knowledge) but also costs (increase potential threat of infertility). Adolescents find fertility information positive but do not learn from it. Fertility education should be tailored according to age groups and created to minimise negative effects. Longitudinal examination of the effects of fertility information in multi-centre studies is warranted and should include measures of perceived threat of infertility. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Cardiff University funded this research. All authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Indexed as

FertilityHealth EducationHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdolescentCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleSexual PartnersYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29788136
PMCPMC6012744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.