ArticlePloS one2025
What women want to hear: the helpful and unhelpful comments reported by women struggling with infertility amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- "For three of my four miscarriages I was at work…" Experiences of miscarriage, infertility and assisted fertility in veterinary workplaces.The Veterinary record · 2026Article
- Benefits and challenges: Qualitative exploration of women's experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic in Fiji.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMany women struggling with infertility report that they frequently experience unhelpful social interactions with well-meaning loved ones and healthcare providers, contributing to a reluctance to confide in others about their infertility and emotional distress. However, it remains unclear what interaction content women experience as 'helpful' versus 'unhelpful,' making it difficult to provide concrete recommendations to the public about how best to support individuals struggling with infertility. METHODOLOGY: Eighty women from Canada and the United States (ages 20-45 years) whose fertility treatments had been cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic were recruited via social media to complete an online survey, which included two open-ended questions about the most helpful and unhelpful social interactions they had had about their infertility. Two independent researchers conducted content analysis to identify categories of helpful and unhelpful social interactions.
resultsThe following six categories were identified by women as helpful: 1) Listening, 2) Fostering hope, 3) Talking to individuals with lived experience, 4) Distraction, 5) Validating emotions, and 6) Tangible support. Responses about unsupportive interactions fell into four categories: 1) Toxic positivity, 2) Advice-giving, 3) Invalidation, and 4) Intruding. Sample quotes from each category are provided.
conclusionThese findings provide valuable insights that can be used to develop future educational materials for the general public on how to interact with individuals experiencing infertility.
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.