Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18829009›Full record

ReviewFertility and sterility2009

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis on in vitro fertilization clinic websites: presentations of risks, benefits and other information.

Robert Klitzman, Beata Zolovska, William Folberth, Mark V Sauer, Wendy Chung, Paul Appelbaum

Registry-linked trialAbstract readEvaluation StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in Fertility and sterility, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02149251 (Does Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis for Sex Selection Affect the Pregnancy and Miscarriage Rates in Women With an Expected Good Ovarian Response Undergoing IVF/ICSI Cycles?), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02149251 completednot on this mapstarted 2014, after this paper: background citation

Does Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis for Sex Selection Affect the Pregnancy and Miscarriage Rates in Women With an Expected Good Ovarian Response Undergoing IVF/ICSI Cycles?

TypeobservationalSponsorCairo UniversityRan2014 to 2014Enrolled11,006ConditionsPregnancyArmsPre-genetic diagnosis
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Robert KlitzmanCollege of Physicians and Surgeons and Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York. Electronic address: rlk2@columbia.edu.
Beata ZolovskaColumbia University Medical Center, Columbia University, New York, New York.
William FolberthColumbia University Medical Center, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Mark V SauerCollege of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Wendy ChungCollege of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Paul AppelbaumCollege of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York.

Funding

CTSA INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PEDIATRIC RESEARCHUL1RR024156 · NCRR · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI GINSBERG, HENRY N · 2006 to 2011
$53.0M
Views of Privacy of Genetic InformationR01HG002431 · NHGRI · NEW YORK STATE PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE · PI KLITZMAN, ROBERT L · 2002 to 2005
$1.5M
Views and Approaches Toward Research Integrity Among IRBsR01HG004214 · NHGRI · NEW YORK STATE PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE DBA RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR MENTAL HYGIENE, INC · PI KLITZMAN, ROBERT L · 2006 to 2007
$567k
NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR024156NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG002431NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG004214
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine information on preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) presented on IVF clinic websites.

designWe systematically sampled every third IVF clinic on the 2004 Centers for Disease Control provider list.

settingThe Internet. PATIENT(S): None. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Benefits, risks, and other types of information mentioned regarding PGD. RESULT(S): Of 135 sites examined, 88.1% had websites, and 70% mentioned PGD, of which 27% were university- or hospital-based and 63% were private clinics. Sites mentioning PGD listed uses and benefits of PGD far more than the risks involved. Of these sites, 76% described testing for single-gene diseases, but fewer mentioned risks of missing target diagnoses (35%) or risks for loss of embryo (18%), and 14% described PGD as new or controversial. Private clinics were more likely than other programs to be on either the East or West Coast, list certain PGD risks (e.g., diagnostic error), note that PGD was new or controversial, reference source of PGD information, provide accuracy rates of genetic testing of embryos, and offer gender selection for social reasons. CONCLUSION(S): Most IVF clinics advertise PGD online, but the scope and quality of information about it varies widely, emphasizing benefits while minimizing risks. Clinics and patients may benefit from more thorough and consistent presentation of PGD, drawing on available evidence to best provide a realistic portrayal of PGD.

Indexed as

Fertilization in VitroInternetAmbulatory Care FacilitiesDatabases as TopicGuideline AdherenceGuidelines as TopicHumansInformation DisseminationPatient Education as TopicPreimplantation DiagnosisRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID18829009
PMCPMC2950118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.