ArticleReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2022
Article in Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Infertility can affect anyone, including Black women who, contrary to popular belief, are most likely to suffer from infertility, less likely to seek fertility care, and more likely to delay or completely forgo fertility treatment (Chin et al Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 29(5):416-25, 5). These trends are likely fueled by deep-rooted stigma generated from a multitude of origins. Some black women may feel uncomfortable discussing their experience with infertility due to the pervasive stereotype that Black women are hyper-fertile (Ceballo et al Psychol Women Q 39(4):497-511, 20). This stereotype also has important implications within the medical field, in which provider implicit bias may affect referrals and treatment plans, further contributing to stratified reproduction (Chapman et al J Gen Intern Med 28(11):1504-10, 15, FitzGerald and Hurst BMC Med Ethics 18(1):19, 16). It is time for the medical community to shift our focus to what we can change, starting with how we perceive the narrative. In order to effect change, providers should first become and remain aware of racial/ethnic disparities within reproduction. We can make a concerted effort to effectively counsel Black women about their fertility and future childbearing goals, as well as strive to debunk false racial/ethnic fertility stereotypes with medical evidence. We should actively work to understand our biases, where they stem from, and how to resolve them. We must aim to always provide respectful, equitable, and consistent care, especially when deciding how to counsel someone regarding fertility preservation and infertility treatment options. In sum, we can approach solving this complicated racial-ethnic gap in health equity by taking small intentional and parallel steps, starting now.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35352332What 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.