SynthesisBMC women's health2025
Screens and society: how media narratives influence fertility and reshape childbearing choices; a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC women's health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond medical indications: exploring nonclinical cesarean section from healthcare providers' perspectives in southeast Iran.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Exploring the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of young men towards fertility in the UK: A cross-sectional survey.PloS one · 2026Article
- Socioeconomic and demographic determinants of children ever born among ever-married women in Somalia: a multilevel negative binomial regression analysis.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDeclining fertility rates pose a significant challenge to global demographic stability. Factors such as shifting societal norms, economic constraints, and women’s empowerment intersect with media influence to shape reproductive behaviors. This systematic review examines the multifaceted role of media including television, radio, social networks, and online platforms in affecting fertility intentions, contraceptive use, and childbearing decisions.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar until 4 May 2025. Keywords related to fertility, media, and reproductive behaviors were used. Eligible studies included quantitative/qualitative designs in English, while reviews, RCT, case studies, and non-population-based research were excluded. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, with a third resolving discrepancies. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using the AXIS and JBI checklists, with 64.3% classified as high quality and 32.2% as moderate.
resultsOut of 1,990 initial records, 27 studies from various countries were analyzed. The results of the study indicated that exposure to mass media was positively associated with the adoption of modern contraceptives. Additionally, media plays a dual role in influencing fertility intentions, family planning use, knowledge and attitude, antenatal care utilization, and childbearing and maternal health decisions, depending on the content, context, and social norms.
conclusionsKey findings reveal that media consistently promotes contraceptive use. Media’s impact on fertility intentions are context-dependent. Geographical and cultural nuances are critical, as media’s impact on social norms varies. Despite methodological limitations, the evidence underscores media’s potential as a public health tool. Policymakers must leverage media to align with public health goals, mitigate economic anxiety in news coverage, and foster global initiatives for youth education. REGISTRATION: The review study was officially registered on the PROSPERO website (CRD420251045938) and received approval from the jury. Available from https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251045938 .
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.