Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35169640›Full record

ArticleReproductive biomedicine & society online2022

At risk of reproductive disadvantage? Exploring fertility awareness among migrant women in Germany.

Nadja Milewski, Sonja Haug

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive biomedicine & society online, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nadja MilewskiFederal Institute for Population Research, Wiesbaden, Germany.
Sonja HaugEastern Bavarian Technical University, Regensburg, Germany.
Federal Institute for Population Research · DERegensburg University of Applied Sciences · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examined awareness about fertility among immigrant women and non-migrants in Germany. The social relevance of infertility and fertility treatment is increasing in Western countries due to continually low overall birth rates, a high rate of childlessness, and a gap between the desired and actual numbers of children. While there is growing interest in infertility and reproductive medicine in general, previous studies have rarely included immigrant or ethnic minorities in Europe. This study investigated whether knowledge on the age-related fertility decline (ARFD) varies between migrant groups and the majority group, and the role of education. Working hypotheses were drawn from theoretical considerations on frameworks of migrant assimilation. The analysis was based on data collected in a social science pilot study on reproductive medicine, representative of the general population ('NeWiRe' 2014-2015). The sample included 962 women aged 18-50 years living in Germany. Approximately 81% of the sample were immigrants who originated from Turkey, Poland, the Balkan countries or countries of the (post-Soviet) Commonwealth of Independent States. While rather poor overall, knowledge on ARFD was found to be significantly lower in the migrant groups compared with the majority group. This minority-group disadvantage cannot be explained by sociodemographic or cultural variables. Future research should include minority groups in empirical studies on awareness about fertility in order to better understand the causes of this disadvantage, and the potential reproductive needs of migrants.

Indexed as

Age-related fertility declineEuropeFertility knowledgeMigrant assimilationMinority groupsNon-patient sample

Identifiers

PMID35169640
PMCPMC8828951
OpenAlexW4206718599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.