Back

Knowledge, attitudes and willingness to donate gametes among university students in Ghana: a cross-sectional study

Amoh, M. Y.; Appiah-Kubi, A.; Dah, A. K.; Azanu, W. K.; Boateng, W.; Wuaku, E. D.; Okai, B. K.; Senaya, C. M.; Djokoto, R. M. K.

2026-10-02 obstetrics and gynecology
10.64898/2026.09.30.26364451 medRxiv
Show abstract

Gamete donation may widen access to assisted reproductive technology, but donor gametes remain difficult to obtain in Ghana. This institution-based cross-sectional survey assessed knowledge, attitudes and willingness to donate among 380 undergraduate students at Ho Technical University. The sample was allocated proportionately across 24 strata defined by six faculties and four academic levels; within each stratum, students who were present during scheduled classes were recruited consecutively. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire and analysed using descriptive statistics, exact tests and exploratory logistic regression. Although 88.2% of participants had heard of gamete donation and 72.4% supported it, only 42.1% said they would donate if approached. Among the 220 participants who were unwilling, 210 (95.5%) selected the response that donation felt wrong to them. Participants who perceived societal attitudes as positive had higher odds of reported willingness than those who perceived them as negative (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-7.08). Belief that donation could exhaust ones gametes was associated with lower odds of willingness (aOR 0.27, 95% CI 0.15-0.48). The conditional statement that payment would increase willingness was also associated with direct willingness (aOR 7.16, 95% CI 4.25-12.06), but the two measures overlapped conceptually. The findings identify fertility misconceptions, concerns about donation and differing views on compensation that should be considered when developing donor information, counselling and protection measures.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.