SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of employer-covered planned oocyte cryopreservation on decision-making for medical training

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

Abstract

Purpose

To characterize how employer coverage of planned oocyte cryopreservation (POC) might impact medical career decision-making.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was distributed to all medical students at two large academic programs in December 2022 to better understand attitudes towards childbearing, POC, and how employer coverage of POC might influence future career decisions.

Results

Of the 630/1933 (32.6%) medical students who participated, 71.8% identified as women and 28.1% as men. More women (89.2%) than men (75.1%, P < 0.001) felt pressure to delay childbearing. Regarding childbearing, women more than men were concerned about the physical demand of residency (76.5% vs. 50.8%, P < 0.001), stigma in residency hiring practices (41.2% vs. 9.0%, P < 0.001), and parental leave interfering with team dynamics (49.6% vs. 20.9%, P < 0.001). Respondents were more likely to pursue POC if it were covered by residency employer health insurance (60.0% vs. 11.6%, P < 0.001). Women were more likely than men to state that employer-sponsored POC would influence their residency ranking (46.0% vs. 23.7%, P < 0.001), pursuit of additional degrees (50.9% vs. 30.5%, P < 0.001), and pursuit of fellowship training (50.9% vs. 30.5%, P < 0.001). Additionally, 25.4% of women and 19.8% of men felt their choice in medical specialty would be impacted by employer-sponsored POC.

Conclusions

Medical students, particularly women, feel pressure to delay childbearing during medical training and are concerned about future fertility. Both male and female students were interested in employer-sponsored POC and more likely to pursue it with financial coverage. Further research is needed to determine the full impact of employer-sponsored POC on medical career decision-making.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Stentz NC, Griffith KA, Perkins E, Jones RD, Jagsi R. Fertility and childbearing among American female physicians. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2016;25(10):1059–65. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2015.5638.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Clark NA, Griffith K, Perkins E, Jagsi R. Experiences with fertility and infertility among generation X physicians. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):S317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.07.975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Rangel EL, Castillo-Angeles M, Easter SR, Atkinson RB, Gosain A, Hu YY, et al. Incidence of infertility and pregnancy complications in US female surgeons. JAMA Surg. 2021;156(10):905–15. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2021.3301.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Association of American Medical Colleges. Matriculating student questionnaire - 2020 all schools summary report. 2020. https://www.aamc.org/media/50081/download. Accessed 1 April 2023.

  5. Allen D, Bosslet G. Application trends in pulmonary and critical care medicine fellowships. ATS Sch. 2022;3(3):347–51. https://doi.org/10.34197/ats-scholar.2021-0133BR.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Huppert LA, Santhosh L, Babik JM. Trends in US internal medicine residency and fellowship applications during the COVID-19 pandemic vs previous years. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(4):e218199. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.8199.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. van Noord-Zaadstra BM, Looman CW, Alsbach H, Habbema JD, te Velde ER, Karbaat J. Delaying childbearing: effect of age on fecundity and outcome of pregnancy. BMJ. 1991;302(6789):1361–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.302.6789.1361.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice. Female age-related fertility decline. Committee opinion no. 589. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(3):633–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Final national summary report for 2019. https://www.sartcorsonline.com/rptCSR_PublicMultYear.aspx. Accessed 24 January 2023.

  10. New York Times. Hope, regret, uncertainty: 7 women on freezing their eggs. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/23/well/family/egg-freezing-fertility.html Accessed 24 January 2023.

  11. Schon SB, Shapiro M, Gracia C, Senapati S. Medical and elective fertility preservation: impact of removal of the experimental label from oocyte cryopreservation. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34(9):1207–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-017-0968-5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Rudick B, Opper N, Paulson R, Bendikson K, Chung K. The status of oocyte cryopreservation in the United States. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(7):2642–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.04.079.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Dowling E, Mercer. New survey finds employers adding fertility benefits to promote DEI. 2021. https://www.mercer.us/our-thinking/healthcare/new-survey-finds-employers-adding-fertility-benefits-to-promote-dei.html. Accessed 31 March 2023.

  14. Geisser L, Bloomberg Law. INSIGHT: employer-subsidized egg freezing benefits—who really pays? 2018. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/insight-employer-subsidized-egg-freezing-benefitswho-really-pays. Accessed 16 May 2023.

  15. Kime P, Military Times. Military’s new fertility benefit will let troops freeze their sperm and eggs. 2016. https://www.militarytimes.com/pay-benefits/military-benefits/health-care/2016/01/29/military-s-new-fertility-benefit-will-let-troops-freeze-their-sperm-and-eggs/#. Accessed 30 May 2023.

  16. Greenwood EA, Pasch L, Huddleston H. Reproductive planning in women undergoing elective egg freeze. Fertil Steril. 2017;108(3):e191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.07.564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jones BP, Kasaven L, L'Heveder A, Jalmbrant M, Green J, Makki M, et al. Perceptions, outcomes, and regret following social egg freezing in the UK; a cross-sectional survey. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020;99(3):324–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13763.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hodes-Wertz B, Druckenmiller S, Smith M, Noyes N. What do reproductive-age women who undergo oocyte cryopreservation think about the process as a means to preserve fertility? Fertil Steril. 2013;100(5):1343–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.07.201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Anspach Will E, Maslow BS, Kaye L, Nulsen J. Increasing awareness of age-related fertility and elective fertility preservation among medical students and house staff: a pre- and post-intervention analysis. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(5):1200–5 e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.03.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 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 

  21. Esfandiari N, Litzky J, Sayler J, Zagadailov P, George K, DeMars L. Egg freezing for fertility preservation and family planning: a nationwide survey of US Obstetrics and Gynecology residents. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2019;17(1):16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-019-0459-x.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Nasab S, Shah JS, Nurudeen K, Jooya ND, Abdallah ME, Sibai BM. Physicians’ attitudes towards using elective oocyte cryopreservation to accommodate the demands of their career. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36(9):1935–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-019-01541-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. American College of Surgeons. What are the surgical specialties? https://www.facs.org/for-medical-professionals/education/online-guide-to-choosing-a-surgical-residency/guide-to-choosing-a-surgical-residency-for-medical-students/faqs/specialties/. Accessed 26 May 2023.

  24. Association of American Medical Colleges. 2022 FACTS: applicants and matriculants data. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/students-residents/data/2022-facts-applicants-and-matriculants-data. Accessed 31 May 2023.

  25. 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(4):711–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.07.1158.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Smith KS, Bakkensen JB, Hutchinson AP, Cheung EO, Thomas J, Grote V, et al. Knowledge of fertility and perspectives about family planning among female physicians. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(5):e2213337. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.13337.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Kin C, Yang R, Desai P, Mueller C, Girod S. Female trainees believe that having children will negatively impact their careers: results of a quantitative survey of trainees at an academic medical center. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18(1):260. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1373-1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Mroz J. A medical career, at a cost: infertility. 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/13/health/women-doctors-infertility.html. Accessed 8 February 2023.

  29. Cusimano MC, Baxter NN, Sutradhar R, McArthur E, Ray JG, Garg AX, et al. Evaluation of adverse pregnancy outcomes in physicians compared with nonphysicians. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(5):e2213521. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.13521.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Cousineau TM, Domar AD. Psychological impact of infertility. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;21(2):293–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.12.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Goulden M, Mason MA, Frasch K. Kee** women in the science pipeline. ANNALS Am Acad Politic Soc Sci. 2011;638(1):141–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716211416925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Orgera K, Mahmood H, Grover A, Assocation of American Medical Colleges Training locaJackson women’s health organization decision.tion preferences of U.S. medical school graduates post Dobbs v. 2023. https://www.aamc.org/advocacy-policy/aamc-research-and-action-institute/training-location-preferences. Accessed July 24, 2023.

  33. Maven Clinic. Fertility benefits: what to actually cover and how to build them. https://www.mavenclinic.com/lp/fertility-benefits-what-to-actually-cover-and-how-to-build-them? Accessed 19 June 2023.

  34. Carr PL, Raj A, Kaplan SE, Terrin N, Breeze JL, Freund KM. Gender differences in academic medicine: retention, rank, and leadership comparisons from the national faculty survey. Acad Med. 2018;93(11):1694–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002146.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Paturel A, Assocation of American Medical Colleges. Where are all the women deans? 2019. https://www.aamc.org/news/where-are-all-women-deans Accessed 31 March 2023.

  36. Richter KP, Clark L, Wick JA, Cruvinel E, Durham D, Shaw P, et al. Women physicians and promotion in academic medicine. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(22):2148–57. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1916935.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Elkadi SH, Donaldson S, Krisanda E, Kessler MW. Trends in medical training and leadership at academic orthopedic programs. Cureus. 2022;14(9):e29100. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.29100.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Pololi LH, Civian JT, Brennan RT, Dottolo AL, Krupat E. Experiencing the culture of academic medicine: gender matters, a national study. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(2):201–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2207-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Harwood K. Egg freezing: a breakthrough for reproductive autonomy? Bioethics. 2009;23(1):39–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00680.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Planned oocyte cryopreservation for women seeking to preserve future reproductive potential: an ethics committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2018;110(6):1022–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.08.027.

Download references

Funding

HM is an NIH-funded T35 Short Term Training Program grant recipient. The NIH played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the paper for publication.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Hana G. Murphy

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Sarah D. Compton, Molly B. Moravek & Monica W. Rosen

Authors
  1. Hana G. Murphy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarah D. Compton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Molly B. Moravek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Monica W. Rosen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Data collection and analysis were performed by HGM, SDC, and MWR. The first draft of the manuscript was written by HGM and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Monica W. Rosen.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This study was approved by the University of Michigan Institutional Review Board and was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent to participate

All surveys were completed anonymously and consent to participate was indicated by survey continuation.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Appendix

Appendix

figure afigure afigure afigure afigure afigure afigure afigure afigure afigure afigure afigure a

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

Murphy, H.G., Compton, S.D., Moravek, M.B. et al. Impact of employer-covered planned oocyte cryopreservation on decision-making for medical training. J Assist Reprod Genet 41, 385–407 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-023-02990-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-023-02990-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation