Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40185908›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of impotence research2025

A review of the changing landscape of vasectomy trends in the United States in the post-dobbs era.

Brittany D Berk, Raevti Bole, Scott D Lundy, Sarah C Vij

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of impotence research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Vasectomy revisited: Safe procedure in a changing reproductive landscape.International journal of impotence research · 2026
    Article
  3. Translational andrology and urology · 2026
    Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Brittany D BerkGlickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, US. berkb2@ccf.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1435-2539
Raevti BoleGlickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, US.
Scott D LundyGlickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, US.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0127-4295
Sarah C VijGlickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, US.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8282-2339

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The United States (U.S.) Supreme Court declared abortion unconstitutional in June 2022 in the Dobbs v. Women's Health Organization hearing. This decision sent shockwaves through the political and medical community. While the immediate impact on female reproductive rights was readily apparent, male counterparts also sought to assert their reproductive autonomy as evidenced by the rapid rise in vasectomy interest across the country. In the months following the decision, rates of vasectomy interest, as measured by Google Search Trends, and vasectomy procedure rates were noted to be increasing across the country. This review aims to summarize the current literature surrounding vasectomy trends following the Dobbs decision, with particular focus on the impact on vasectomy trends in various geographic regions and across different age groups and marital status. To date, five studies have been published exploring increasing public interest in vasectomy, as measured by internet search trends, five studies have been published exploring trends in vasectomy consultation post-Dobbs, including three primary single-center studies, and one study has been published regarding social media themes surrounding vasectomy in the U.S. These data highlight the impact of the decisions regarding female reproductive rights on the healthcare decisions by males in this country, placing vasectomists at the heart of the discussion.

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.