Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40673019›Full record

ArticleRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2025

Exploring awareness and attitudes toward oocyte cryopreservation among women of reproductive age.

Pedro Brandão, Rui Cândido, Fábio Carvalho, Liliane Nunes, Patrícia Matos, Pedro Frias, Marisa Coelho

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Pedro BrandãoUniversidade do Porto Porto Business School Porto Portugal Porto Business School, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1470-184X
Rui CândidoUniversidade do Porto Porto Business School Porto Portugal Porto Business School, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4296-6510
Fábio CarvalhoUniversidade do Porto Porto Business School Porto Portugal Porto Business School, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-1653-7402
Liliane NunesUniversidade do Porto Porto Business School Porto Portugal Porto Business School, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-1746-3214
Patrícia MatosUniversidade do Porto Porto Business School Porto Portugal Porto Business School, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9262-6531
Pedro FriasUniversidade do Porto Porto Business School Porto Portugal Porto Business School, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-4083-3161
Marisa CoelhoUniversidade do Porto Porto Business School Porto Portugal Porto Business School, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0197-8081

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate awareness, perceptions, and attitudes toward oocyte cryopreservation among a diverse group of women. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in November 2023 using snowball sampling to distribute a structured questionnaire. The target population included women aged 18+ with childbearing potential, proficient in English. An anonymous online survey with 22 questions collected data on demographics, education, occupation, relationship status, reproductive intentions, and perceptions of oocyte cryopreservation. Results: A total of 502 responses were analyzed. Most participants were in their thirties, had higher education, and were in committed relationships. They represented 24 countries, mainly in Europe. Over 60% planned to have children, but 85% were unfamiliar with oocyte cryopreservation. Social media (56%) was the primary information source, followed by acquaintances (33%) and healthcare professionals (25%). Only 4.6% were actively considering the procedure, while 41.3% showed potential interest. Barriers included perceived lack of necessity, age concerns, and limited information. Women considering cryopreservation were typically younger and childless. Financial constraints and information gaps significantly influenced decision-making, with about one-third suggesting better information and cost reduction could increase willingness to pursue the procedure. Conclusion: Despite relatively high awareness of oocyte cryopreservation, actual consideration and uptake remain low. Addressing financial and informational barriers could improve acceptance, especially among younger women and those uncertain about their reproductive plans.

Indexed as

CryopreservationFertility PreservationHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeOocyte RetrievalReproductive BehaviorAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesCryopreservationFertilityFertility preservationInfertilityOocytesSurveys and questionnairesWomen's health

Identifiers

PMID40673019
PMCPMC12266863

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.