ArticleBMC medical ethics2022
'I feel that injustice is being done to me': a qualitative study of women's viewpoints on the (lack of) reimbursement for social egg freezing.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fertility knowledge and family planning perspectives among female physicians: a cross-sectional study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Socio-demographic profiles, motivations and perspectives of women undergoing publicly funded elective fertility preservation: a nationwide multicenter study in France.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Observational
- Ethical analysis of the European normative framework on fertility preservation.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Ethics of non-oncological fertility preservation from the perspective of the four principles of bioethics.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- Ethical perspectives of fertility preservation through experts' opinions.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- Who freezes her eggs and why? psychological predictors, reasons, and outcomes of social egg freezing.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2025Article
- Oocyte retrieval in social fertility preservation: challenging traditional beliefs on gonadotropin dosing and follicular size.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Too much equity - is there such a thing? The public discourse surrounding elective egg freezing subsidy in Israel.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring the last decade, the possibility for women to cryopreserve oocytes in anticipation of age-related fertility loss, also referred to as social egg freezing, has become an established practice at fertility clinics around the globe. In Europe, there is extensive variation in the costs for this procedure, with the common denominator that there are almost no funding arrangements or reimbursement policies. This is the first qualitative study that specifically explores viewpoints on the (lack of) reimbursement for women who had considered to uptake at least one social egg freezing cycle in Belgium.
methodsTo understand the moral considerations of these women, drawing from twenty-one interviews, this paper integrates elements of a symbiotic empirical ethics approach and thematic analysis.
resultsWe identify four themes: (1) being confronted with unclear information; (2) financial costs as ongoing concern; (3) necessity of coverage; (4) extent of reimbursement. In the first theme, we found that some women were concerned about the lack of clear information about the cost of social egg freezing. In the second theme, we report moral sentiments of injustice and discrimination which some women attributed to their struggles and needs not being recognised. The third theme illustrates diverse views on reimbursement, ranging from viewing social egg freezing as an elective treatment not appropriate for reimbursement to preferences for greater public responsibility and wider access. Finally, we describe the participants' varying proposals for partial reimbursement and the idea that it should not be made available for free.
conclusionsThis research adds important empirical insights to the bioethics debate on social egg freezing, in particular by presenting (potential) users' views on the lack of reimbursement. While there is much more to say about the ethical and political complexities of the reimbursement of this procedure, our study highlighted the voices of (potential) users and showed that at least some of them would welcome the coverage of SEF through the public healthcare insurance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.