Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36970993›Full record

ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2023

Social egg freezing: Motivations, treatment experiences and the impact of Covid-19 - a single-center experience.

Sughashini Murugesu, Mikaela Maria Charalambides, Benjamin P Jones, Srdjan Saso, Raef Faris, Jaya Parikh, James Nicopoullos, Meen-Yau Thum, Timothy Bracewell-Milnes

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Trends in patient age at planned oocyte cryopreservation.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024
    Observational
  6. Article
  7. Social Egg Freezing-A Trend or Modern Reality?Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  8. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sughashini MurugesuDepartment of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Institute of Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8852-0892
Mikaela Maria CharalambidesDepartment of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Section of Investigative Medicine, Imperial College School of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Benjamin P JonesQueen Charlotte's Hospital, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0391-0443
Srdjan SasoDepartment of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Institute of Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Raef FarisGynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Lister Fertility Clinic, London, UK.
Jaya ParikhGynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Lister Fertility Clinic, London, UK.
James NicopoullosGynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Lister Fertility Clinic, London, UK.
Meen-Yau ThumGynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Lister Fertility Clinic, London, UK.
Timothy Bracewell-MilnesGynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Lister Fertility Clinic, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9827-4816
Lister Hospital · GBHammersmith Hospital · GBImperial College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThis study aims to assess the motivations and treatment experiences of women undergoing social egg freezing and to understand the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. MATERIAL AND

methodsBetween January 2011 to December 2021, 191 social egg freezing patients were recruited from the Lister Fertility Clinic, London UK. Participants completed a validated questionnaire investigating patients' perspectives of social egg freezing. A response rate of 46.6% was achieved.

resultsIn all, 93.9% of women expressed concern regarding age-related fertility decline which influenced their decision to undergo social egg freezing. The majority (89.5%) of women were not in a relationship at the time of social egg freezing and considered this a motivating factor. Also, 39.0% of participants had side effects related to treatment which affected work and social life. Participants were significantly more likely to experience side effects if they underwent multiple egg freezing cycles (χ

conclusionsMost participants did not regret their decision to undergo social egg freezing but the majority wished they had cryopreserved oocytes at a younger age. This highlights the importance of early education to optimize outcomes and patient choice. The egg freezing process can be stressful, women may have concerns around social egg freezing and unprecedented situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic may alter treatment experience.

Indexed as

COVID-19Fertility PreservationCryopreservationFemaleHumansMotivationOocytesPandemicsCOVID-19experienceknowledgemotivationsregretsocial egg freezing

Identifiers

PMID36970993
PMCPMC10201961
OpenAlexW4361007370

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.