Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Aug 8;1(3):177-185.
doi: 10.1016/j.xfre.2020.08.002. eCollection 2020 Dec.

Knowledge gaps in the understanding of fertility among non-medical graduate students

Affiliations

Knowledge gaps in the understanding of fertility among non-medical graduate students

Lia A Bernardi et al. F S Rep. .

Abstract

Objective: To assess knowledge of female and male fertility among students enrolled in a Master of Business Administration (MBA) program.

Design: Web-based cross-sectional survey.

Setting: Academic setting.

Patients: Not applicable.

Interventions: None.

Main outcome measures: Knowledge of how female and male age impacts reproduction, fecundability, and success rates with in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Results: A total of 133 female and male MBA students completed the survey. Nearly 10% of participants were not aware that women are born with a fixed number of oocytes and that oocyte quantity and quality decline with age. More than 30% of participants overestimated fecundability in women aged ≥35 years, and >50% overestimated IVF success rates in women older than 40 years. Fifteen percent of participants did not know that men have stem cells in the testes, and >25% were not aware that men experience a decrease in sperm concentration and quality with age. Nearly 30% believed that a man's age never impacts reproductive outcomes. Less than 30% of participants correctly estimated fecundability and IVF success rates based on male age.

Conclusions: These data highlight important knowledge gaps in a highly educated group of MBA students, most whom desire future childbearing. Specifically, there is a lack of understanding of both male and female reproductive aging and an overestimation of treatment success. As delayed childbearing continues, particularly among those with high educational attainment, attention should be focused on introducing broad fertility education at a younger age to improve future reproductive success.

Keywords: Fertility knowledge; delayed childbearing; female fertility; male fertility; reproductive aging.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Proportion of participants that correctly, overestimated, or underestimated miscarriage rates by female age.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Proportion of participants that estimated fecundability rates of 1%, 10%, 15%, 25%, 50%, and 80% based on female age when male age was <35 years. ∗Correct response.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Proportion of participants that estimated in vitro fertilization success rates of 1%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 25%, 40%, and 80% based on female age when male age was <35 years. ∗Correct response.

Comment in

References

    1. Wyndham N., Marin Figueira P.G., Patrizio P. A persistent misperception: assisted reproductive technology can reverse the “aged biological clock.”. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:1044–1047. - PubMed
    1. Kudesia R., Chernyak E., McAvey B. Low fertility awareness in United States reproductive-aged women and medical trainees: creation and validation of the Fertility & Infertility Treatment Knowledge Score (FIT-KS) Fertil Steril. 2017;108:711–717. - PubMed
    1. Pedro J., Brandão T., Schmidt L., Costa M.E., Martins M.V. What do people know about fertility? A systematic review on fertility awareness and its associated factors. Ups J Med Sci. 2018;123:71–81. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shao Y.H., Tulandi T., Abenhaim H.A. evaluating the quality and reliability of online information on social fertility preservation. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2020;42:561–567. - PubMed
    1. Lampic C., Svanberg A.S., Karlström P., Tydén T. Fertility awareness, intentions concerning childbearing, and attitudes towards parenthood among female and male academics. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:558–564. - PubMed