Hum. Reprod. Advance Access published online on December 17, 2004
Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/deh574
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Center for Epidemiology & Health Research Berlin, Berlin, Germany
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. BACKGROUND: Following extensive research activity to develop an effective agent to control male fertility, such a product may be available for use within
Received March 18, 2004
Revised June 21, 2004
Accepted September 29, 2004
Article
Attitudes toward male fertility control: results of a multinational survey on four continents
2 GBU Gynaecology and Andrology, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany
Klaas Heinemann, E-mail: klaas{at}zeg-berlin.de
Abstract 
5 years. However, little is known concerning contraceptive knowledge, desires and attitudes of men in different countries, and their acceptance of male fertility control (MFC). METHODS: A survey of >9000 males aged 18-50 years was performed in nine countries on four continents in 2002. The objective was to compare, on a cross-cultural basis, the knowledge, attitudes and acceptability of MFC among men and assess their willingness to use such a method. RESULTS: Between 50 and 83% of the male respondents currently use contraceptive methods, and 55-81.5% reported that both partners participate in selecting the method of contraception employed. Overall acceptance of hormonal MFC was high (>55%), with 28.5-71.4% of survey participants of various nationalities expressing the willingness to use such a method. CONCLUSION: While MFC appears to be well accepted overall, the willingness to use this type of contraception varies widely between differing population groups. The specific characteristics and profile of any MFC product will have to be carefully evaluated to accurately assess its acceptance, both by men and their female partners.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  E. Nieschlag Male Hormonal Contraception: Love's Labour's Lost? J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., June 1, 2009; 94(6): 1890 - 1892. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Y. Liu and R. I. McLachlan Male Hormonal Contraception: So Near and Yet So Far J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., July 1, 2008; 93(7): 2474 - 2476. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Mommers, W. M. Kersemaekers, J. Elliesen, M. Kepers, D. Apter, H. M. Behre, J. Beynon, P. M. Bouloux, A. Costantino, H.-P. Gerbershagen, et al. Male Hormonal Contraception: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., July 1, 2008; 93(7): 2572 - 2580. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. T. Page, J. K. Amory, and W. J. Bremner Advances in Male Contraception Endocr. Rev., June 1, 2008; 29(4): 465 - 493. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. K. Amory, T. F. Kalhorn, and S. T. Page Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Oral Testosterone Enanthate Plus Dutasteride for 4 Weeks in Normal Men: Implications for Male Hormonal Contraception J Androl, May 1, 2008; 29(3): 260 - 271. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M.C. Meriggiola, S. Cerpolini, W.J. Bremner, M.T. Mbizvo, K.M. Vogelsong, G. Martorana, and G. Pelusi Acceptability of an injectable male contraceptive regimen of norethisterone enanthate and testosterone undecanoate for men Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2006; 21(8): 2033 - 2040. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. L. Matthiesson and R. I. McLachlan Male hormonal contraception: concept proven, product in sight? Hum. Reprod. Update, July 1, 2006; 12(4): 463 - 482. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. V. Marcell, K. Plowden, and S. M. Bowman Exploring older adolescents' and young adults' attitudes regarding male hormonal contraception: applications for clinical practice Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2005; 20(11): 3078 - 3084. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|