ArticleF&S reports2023
Expectations for family building, assisted reproduction, and adoption among lesbians in the National Survey of Family Growth, 2017-2019.
Article in F&S reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of reproductive technologies for shared conception in same-sex female couples.Fertility and sterility · 2024Pooled it
- Exploring parenthood intentions and perceptions of infertility and assisted reproductive technology among 2SLGBTQIA + young adults in Ontario, Canada: a mixed methods study.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2025Article
- Holistic Sexual-Reproductive Healthcare Services and Needs for Queer Individuals: Healthcare Providers' Perspectives.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To characterize the family-building goals and experiences of lesbians compared with those of heterosexual females in the United States. Design: Secondary analysis of nationally representative, cross-sectional survey data. Setting: National Survey of Family Growth 2017-2019. Patients: 159 reproductive-age lesbian respondents and 5,127 reproductive-age heterosexual respondents. Interventions: We characterized family-building goals and the use of assisted reproduction and adoption among lesbians using nationally representative female respondent data from the 2017-2019 National Survey of Family Growth. We performed bivariate analyses examining variations in these outcomes between lesbian and heterosexual individuals. Main Outcome Measures: Wantedness of children, use of assisted reproductive technology, and pursuit of adoption among reproductive-age lesbian and heterosexual participants. Results: We identified 159 reproductive-age lesbian respondents of the National Survey of Family Growth, representing 2.3% or approximately 1.75 million US individuals of reproductive age. The lesbian respondents were younger, less religious, and less likely to have children than heterosexual respondents. These groups did not differ significantly by race/ethnicity, education, or income. More than half of the individuals reported wanting a child in the future, with proportions similar between the lesbian and heterosexual individuals (48% vs. 51%, respectively; Conclusions: Approximately half of US females of reproductive age desire to have a child, a proportion that is not different between lesbian and heterosexual individuals. However, fewer lesbians are asked about their desires to get pregnant, and fewer ever become pregnant. Lesbians are significantly more likely to pursue assisted reproductive services when covered by insurance and more likely to seek adoption. Unfortunately, lesbians are more likely to face challenges with adoption.
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.