Declining realisation of reproductive intentions with age.

What is the likelihood of having a child within 4 years for men and women with strong short-term reproductive intentions, and how is it affected by age? For women, the likelihood of realising reproductive intentions decreased steeply from age 35: the effect of age was weak and not significant for men. Men and women are postponing childbearing until later ages. For women, this trend is associated with a higher risk that childbearing plans will not be realised due to increased levels of infertility and pregnancy complications. This study analyses two waves of the nationally representative Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey. The analytical sample interviewed in 2011 included 447 men aged 18-45 and 528 women aged 18-41. These respondents expressed a strong intention to have a child in the next 3 years. We followed them up in 2015 to track whether their reproductive intention was achieved or revised. Multinomial logistic regression is used to account for the three possible outcomes: (i) having a child, (ii) not having a child but still intending to have one in the future and (iii) not having a child and no longer intending to have one. We analyse how age, parity, partnership status, education, perceived ability to conceive, self-rated health, BMI and smoking status are related to realising or changing reproductive intentions. Almost two-thirds of men and women realised their strong short-term fertility plans within 4 years. There was a steep age-related decline in realising reproductive intentions for women in their mid- and late-30s, whereas men maintained a relatively high probability of having the child they intended until age 45. Women aged 38-41 who planned to have a child were the most likely to change their plan within 4 years. The probability of realising reproductive intention was highest for married and highly educated men and women and for those with one child. Our study cannot separate biological, social and cultural reasons for not realising reproductive intentions. Men and women adjust their intentions in response to their actual circumstances, but also in line with their perceived ability to have a child or under the influence of broader social norms on reproductive age. Our results give a new perspective on the ability of men and women to realise their reproductive plans in the context of childbearing postponement. They confirm the inequality in the individual consequences of delayed reproduction between men and women. They inform medical practitioners and counsellors about the complex biological, social and normative barriers to reproduction among women at higher childbearing ages. This research was partly supported by a Research School of Social Sciences Visiting Fellowship at the Australian National University and an Australian Research Council Discovery Project (DP150104248). Éva Beaujouan's work was partly funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) project 'Later Fertility in Europe' (Grant agreement no. P31171-G29). This paper uses unit record data from the HILDA Survey. The HILDA Project was initiated and is funded by the Australian Government Department of Social Services (DSS) and is managed by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (Melbourne Institute). The findings and views reported in this paper, however, are those of the authors and should not be attributed to either DSS or the Melbourne Institute. The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Beaujouan É ，Reimondos A ，Gray E ，Evans A ，Sobotka T ... -  《-》

The ABC of reproductive intentions: a mixed-methods study exploring the spectrum of attitudes towards family building.

What are the intentions of men and women of reproductive age in the UK regarding reproduction and family building? We identified six main categories of people; Avoiders, Betweeners, Completers, Desirers, Expectants and Flexers, for whom reproduction education strategies should be tailored differently to suit intentions. Several studies have highlighted poor fertility awareness across men and women of reproductive age. As the average age of first-time parents continues to rise, there has been a concerted effort from educators, healthcare professionals, charities, reproductive health groups and government policymakers, to improve fertility awareness. In order to ensure that these messages are effective and to deploy the best strategies, it is important to understand people's reproductive health needs. This study therefore aimed to explore different reproductive intentions to aid tailoring of information to help individuals and couples achieve their family building desires. We conducted a mixed-method study via a UK-wide cross-sectional survey with 1082 participants and semi-structured interviews of 20 women and 15 men who agreed to follow-up interviews. Interviews lasted an hour on average. Ethics approval from UCL Research Ethics Committee. Survey participants were recruited nationwide via online newspaper and social media adverts. Interviewees were purposely sampled to include men and women from the reproductive age range (18-45 years), varying ethnicity and education background. Survey data were analysed using the Minitab statistical software package. Interview data were transcribed and analysed using the framework method. From the survey and interviews, we identified six key categories of people, grouped alphabetically, in a user-friendly manner to highlight a spectrum of reproductive intentions: Avoiders describes respondents who have no children and do not want to have children in the future; Betweeners describes those who already have child(ren) and want more in the future but are not actively trying to conceive; Completers describes those who have child(ren) but do not want more; Desirers describes those who are actively trying to conceive or plan to have child(ren) in the future; Expectants describes those who were pregnant at the time of the study; and Flexers describes those who may or may not already have and are unsure but or open to having child(ren) in the future. Analysis of survey data identified the following proportions in our study: Avoiders, 4.7%; Betweeners, 11.3%; Completers, 13.6%; Desirers, 36.9%; Expectants, 4.1%; and Flexers 28.4% and 2.4% preferring not to answer. There was one 'other' group from qualitative analysis, who would like to have children in the future but were unsure whether they could or had changing views. We recommend classifying as 'Desirers' or 'Flexers' for the purposes of fertility education. A majority of the survey population were trying to get pregnant; were pregnant; or planning to have a child in the future-whether actively, passively or simply open to the idea, with interviews providing deep insights into their family building decision-making. Due to the online recruitment method, there may be a bias towards more educated respondents. We developed a user-friendly, alphabetical categorization of reproductive intentions, which may be used by individuals, healthcare professionals, educators, special interest groups, charities and policymakers to support and enable individuals and couples in making informed choices to achieve their desired intentions, if and when they choose to start a family. There was no external funding for this study. The authors report no competing interests. N/A.

Grace B ，Shawe J ，Johnson S ，Usman NO ，Stephenson J ... -  《-》

Examining the psychosocial determinants of women's decisions to delay childbearing.

What are the psychosocial determinants of women's intentions to delay childbearing until after 35 years? Attitudes, pressure from important others, perceived self-confidence and anticipated regret all influence the decision-making process of women aged 18-30 years to defer their attempts to conceive their first child until 35+ years. Research has consistently demonstrated that, for many women, the decision to delay childbearing can lead to 'unintentional childlessness' due to a failure to consider the impact of age-related fertility decline. A large body of literature has also found strong links between age-related involuntary infertility and negative psychological impacts, including an increased prevalence of anxiety, depression, guilt, stigma and poor mental health. The study initially conducted focus groups designed to ascertain important beliefs informing participants' intentions to delay childbearing. A subsequent larger-scale quantitative questionnaire followed. Participants (n = 358) were female, aged between 18 and 30 years, lived in Australia, identified as being open to the idea of having children, were heterosexual, had not already had children, were not already pregnant, and had not received a diagnosis of medical infertility prior to participating. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed strong support for psychosocial predictors of attitude, pressure from others and perceived self-confidence as predictors of women's intentions to delay childbearing, accounting for 59% of total variance. The extended model that included anticipated regret, accounted for a significant additional 4.4% variance in intention to delay childbearing past the age of 35 years. Proportionally more participants were younger, Caucasian, and were university students, thus limiting the generalizability of results to the wider Australian community. Future research in this domain is recommended to adopt a prospective design and incorporate a measure of behaviour to investigate the link between intentions to delay childbearing and future fertility behaviour. This research augments our understanding of the decision-making process and key beliefs underlying the decision to delay childbearing. Further efforts are needed to advise young women to investigate their fertility options during the peak of their reproductive years in order to prevent negative psychological consequences associated with unintentional childlessness. None.

Kearney AL ，White KM 《-》

Women's career priority is associated with attitudes towards family planning and ethical acceptance of reproductive technologies.

Do women who place high importance on career success have different perceptions of pregnancy planning, delayed reproduction, and the ethical acceptability of ART than women with less emphasis on their career? Career-focused women place more importance on pregnancy planning, have greater confidence in delayed childbearing, and are more ethically accepting of donor gamete ART than women who do not place as much importance on career success. Women in high-professional careers are more likely to delay childbearing while simultaneously possessing a stronger desire for motherhood. The underlying values which enable these competing desires have not been elucidated. This cross-sectional study utilized data from the National Survey of Fertility Barriers (NSFB), a nationally representative telephone survey of US women aged 25-45. Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the NSFB surveyed 4712 women from 2004 to 2007. In addition to demographic data, the NSFB obtained information about the reproductive history and personal values of participants. Weighted multivariate regression analysis was used to assess reproductive values in career-focused women. In total, 48.8% of women considered success in work very important, while 17.3% considered it somewhat or not important. Women who placed less value on career success were less likely to consider pregnancy planning important and were less optimistic about the success of delayed childbearing than their work-centric counterparts. Women less focused on their careers were also more likely to have serious ethical concerns about donor gametes, but less likely to have ethical concerns about IUI or IVF, when compared to career-focused women. Intention to bear children could not be evaluated in the setting of career intentions due to a lack of data on when the participant intended on pursuing motherhood. Political preferences on reproductive health were also not evaluated. The validity of the career priority questions has not been assessed. Additionally, respondents' value statements were not matched to subsequent actions, so it remains possible that these values do not directly impact reproductive behaviors. Our results suggest that reproductive counseling for career-focused women should focus on effective contraception when attempting to delay pregnancy, improved knowledge about age-related fertility decline, and the scope and limitations of current reproductive technologies. In addition, the unique reproductive views of career-focused women suggest that they may benefit from increased employer/insurer support for strategies to enable delayed childbearing, such as fertility preservation and third-party reproduction. None.

Simoni MK ，Mu L ，Collins SC 《-》

BMI in childhood and adolescence is associated with impaired reproductive function-a population-based cohort study from birth to age 50 years.

What is the association between childhood and adolescent BMI and reproductive capacity in women? Adolescent girls with obesity had an increased risk of infertility and childlessness in adulthood independently of their marital status or the presence of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Girls with obesity (BMI (kg/m2)>95th percentile) more often exhibit menstrual irregularities and infertility problems as compared to those with normal weight, and premenarcheal girls with obesity have an increased risk of childlessness and infertility in adulthood. Follow-up studies on the relation between childhood and adolescence growth patterns and fertility or parity throughout the reproductive life span are limited. A prospective, population-based cohort study (the Northern Finland birth cohort 1966) was performed with 5889 women born in 1966 and followed from birth to age 50 years. Postal questionnaires at ages 31 and 46 years addressed questions on reproductive capacity evaluated by decreased fecundability, need for infertility assessment and treatment by 46 years of age. Childlessness and number of children by age 50 years were recovered from registers. Women who did not report ever having attempted to achieve pregnancy (n = 1507) were excluded. The final study population included 4382 women who attempted to achieve pregnancy before age 46 years. Data on BMI were collected by trained personnel at all stages. We assessed association with both prospectively measured BMI at various time points and with early adiposity phenotypes derived from linear mixed models including the timing and the BMI at adiposity peak (AP) and adiposity rebound (AR). Self-reported infertility assessments and treatments were assessed at ages 31 and 46 years. Data on deliveries were collected from the national birth register. Decreased fecundability was defined at age 31 years as time to achieve pregnancy over 12 months. Logistic regression analyses were conducted with adjustments for marital status, education level and smoking at age 31 years. Women with PCOS were excluded from stratification-based sensitivity analyses. Obesity at a specific age group was defined by having at least one BMI value above the 95th percentile during the related period. BMI at the age of AR (5-7 years) was not associated with fertility outcomes after adjustments, but girls with AR <5.1 years had a higher risk of remaining childless compared to girls with AR over 5.1 years (adjusted odds ratio (OR): 1.45 (1.10-1.92)). At ages 7-10 and 11-15 years, obesity was associated with decreased fecundability (adjusted OR 2.05 (1.26-3.35) and 2.04 (1.21-3.44), respectively) and a lower number of children. At age 11-15 years, both overweight and obesity were associated with a higher risk of childlessness (adjusted OR 1.56 (1.06-2.27), 1.77 (1.02-3.07), respectively), even after excluding women with PCOS. Underweight at age 11-15 years was associated with an increased risk for infertility treatment (adjusted OR 1.55 (1.02-2.36)) and a tendency for an increased risk for infertility assessment (adjusted OR 1.43 (0.97-2.10)) after excluding women with PCOS. Despite a high participation rate throughout the follow-up, some growth data for children over the different age groups were missing. Infertility outcomes were self-reported. A potential over-diagnosis of obesity may have reduced the significance of the association between childhood obesity and fertility outcomes, and the diagnosis of PCOS was self-reported. This study supports previous results showing that girls with obesity in late childhood and in adolescence displayed reduced fertility and an increased risk of remaining childless in adulthood, independently of marital history and PCOS in adulthood. These findings corroborate the body of evidence for a causal relation between early adiposity and the reproductive functions in women. We recommend reinforcing the prevention of obesity in school-age girls to reduce the risk of impaired reproductive functions. NFBC1966 received financial support from University of Oulu Grant no. 65354, Oulu University Hospital Grant no. 2/97, 8/97, Ministry of Health and Social Affairs Grant no. 23/251/97, 160/97, 190/97, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki Grant no. 54121, Regional Institute of Occupational Health, Oulu, Finland Grant no. 50621, 54231. The Finnish Medical Foundation, the North Ostrobothnia Regional Fund, the Academy of Finland (project grants 315921, 104781, 120315, 129269, 1114194, 24300796), Center of Excellence in Complex Disease Genetics and SALVE, the Sigrid Juselius Foundation, Biocenter Oulu, University Hospital Oulu and University of Oulu (75617), Jalmari ja Rauha Ahokkaan säätiö, The Finnish Medical Foundation, Medical Research Center Oulu, National Institute for Health Research (UK). M. R. J., S. S. and R. N. received funding by the Academy of Finland (#268336) and the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (under Grant agreement no. 633595 for the DynaHEALTH action and GA 733206 for LifeCycle). The funders had no role in study design, in the collection, analysis and interpretation of the data, in the writing of the article and in the decision to submit it for publication. The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose. N/A.

Laru J ，Nedelec R ，Koivuaho E ，Ojaniemi M ，Järvelin MR ，Tapanainen JS ，Franks S ，Tolvanen M ，Piltonen TT ，Sebert S ，Morin-Papunen L ... -  《-》