Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What do female medical students know about planned oocyte cryopreservation and what are their personal attitudes?

  • Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract   

Purpose

This study aimed to assess medical student knowledge and attitudes regarding oocyte cryopreservation, as well as attitudes regarding future intentions of utilizing this procedure.

Methods

This cross-sectional web-based survey study was distributed to 873 medical students at the University of Kansas from July through September 2018. The survey was self-reported and female medical student responses were analyzed. Students were surveyed through a variety of multiple-choice questions on demographics, knowledge of oocyte cryopreservation, and factors and attitudes that would impact personal and professional use of oocyte cryopreservation.

Results

A total of 122 female responses were collected (30%). A majority of female medical students were aware of oocyte cryopreservation, less than half correctly identified a dramatic drop in female fertility as well as oocyte cryopreservation success and cost-effectiveness. Three-quarters felt pressure to delay childbearing and nearly two-thirds would consider freezing their oocytes. Several factors were found to alter their decision toward oocyte cryopreservation including personal factors, procedure complexity and availability, and outcomes.

Conclusions

A majority of female medical students are amenable to the possibility of using oocyte cryopreservation to delay childbearing. Though nearly all knew of oocyte cryopreservation, knowledge regarding fertility and oocyte cryopreservation was low.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Raw data is available by emailing the corresponding author.

References 

  1. The Practice Committees of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Mature oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(1):37–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.028.

  2. Gianaroli L, Racowsky C, Geraedts J, Cedars M, Makrigiannakis A, Lobo RA. Best practices of ASRM and ESHRE: a journey through reproductive medicine. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(6):1380–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.07.1164.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Matthews TJ, Hamilton BE. First births to older women continue to rise. NCHS Data Brief. 2014;152:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Matthews TJ, Hamilton BE. Delayed childbearing: more women are having their first child later in life. NCHS Data Brief. 2009;21:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chandra A, Copen CE, Stephen EH. Infertility and impaired fecundity in the United States, 1982–2010: data from the National Survey of Family Growth. Natl Health Stat Report. 2013;67:1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ikemoto LC. Egg freezing, stratified reproduction and the logic of not. J Law Biosci. 2015;2(1):112–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsu037.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Mertes H. Does company-sponsored egg freezing promote or confine women’s reproductive autonomy? J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32(8):1205–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-015-0500-8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Zoll M, Mertes H, Gupta J. Corporate giants provide fertility benefits: have they got it wrong? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015;195:A1-2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.10.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Goold I, Savulescu J. In favour of freezing eggs for non-medical reasons. Bioethics. 2009;23(1):47–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00679.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mroz J. A medical career, at a cost: infertility. In: The New York Times. 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/13/health/women-doctors-infertility.html.

  11. Nekkebroeck J, Stoop D, Devroey P. O-036 A preliminary profile of women opting for oocyte cryopreservation for non-medical reasons. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(20100600):i15–6.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Petropanagos A, Cattapan A, Baylis F, Leader A. Social egg freezing: risk, benefits and other considerations. CMAJ : Canadian Med Assoc J. 2015;187(9):666–9. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.141605.PubMedPMID:PMC4467930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Stewart C. Reasons among U.S. women for egg freezing. Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/298452/egg-freezing-reasons-us-women/. 2013. Accessed 5 Apr 2018.

  14. Ikhena-Abel DE, Confino R, Shah NJ, Lawson AK, Klock SC, Robins JC, et al. Is employer coverage of elective egg freezing coercive?: a survey of medical students’ knowledge, intentions, and attitudes towards elective egg freezing and employer coverage. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34(8):1035–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-017-0956-9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Menken J, Trussell J, Larsen U. Age and infertility. Science. 1986;233(4771):1389–94. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3755843.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schwartz D, Mayaux MJ. Female fecundity as a function of age: results of artificial insemination in 2193 nulliparous women with azoospermic husbands. Federation CECOS N Engl J Med. 1982;306(7):404–6. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198202183060706.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tietze C. Reproductive span and rate of reproduction among Hutterite women. Fertil Steril. 1957;8(1):89–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)32587-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gnoth C, Godehardt D, Godehardt E, Frank-Herrmann P, Freundl G. Time to pregnancy: results of the German prospective study and impact on the management of infertility. Hum Reprod. 2003;18(9):1959–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg366.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Speroff L, Fritz MA. Clinical gynecologic endocrinology and infertility. 7th edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005.

  20. Wang X, Chen C, Wang L, Chen D, Guang W, French J. Conception, early pregnancy loss, and time to clinical pregnancy: a population-based prospective study. Fertil Steril. 2003;79(3):577–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mesen TB, Mersereau JE, Kane JB, Steiner AZ. Optimal timing for elective egg freezing. Fertil Steril. 2015;103(6):1551–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.002.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Tan SQ, Tan AW, Lau MS, Tan HH, Nadarajah S. Social oocyte freezing: a survey among Singaporean female medical students. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014;40(5):1345–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.12347.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS, 67214, USA

    Austin G. Armstrong

  2. Departement of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS, 67214, USA

    Maggie Woods, Jennifer Keomany & David Grainger

  3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 633 N. St. Clair Ave, Suite 18-027, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Shriya Shah & MaryEllen Pavone

Authors
  1. Austin G. Armstrong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maggie Woods
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jennifer Keomany
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David Grainger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Shriya Shah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. MaryEllen Pavone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All listed authors contributed to the basis and design of this project. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Austin Armstrong and Jennifer Keomany. Manuscript was drafted by Maggie Woods. All authors were involved in manuscript editing and approved the final manuscript for submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to MaryEllen Pavone.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Study was approved by University of Kansas Medical Center Institutional Review Board.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Armstrong, A.G., Woods, M., Keomany, J. et al. What do female medical students know about planned oocyte cryopreservation and what are their personal attitudes?. J Assist Reprod Genet 40, 1305–1311 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-023-02845-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-023-02845-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation