Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24505563›Full record

ArticleClinical and experimental reproductive medicine2013

Irish public opinion on assisted human reproduction services: Contemporary assessments from a national sample.

David J Walsh, E Scott Sills, Gary S Collins, Christine A Hawrylyshyn, Piotr Sokol, Anthony Ph Walsh

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and experimental reproductive medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

David J WalshDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology, The Sims Institute/Sims IVF, Dublin, Ireland. ; Department of Obstetrics and Gynacology, School of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
E Scott SillsDivision of Applied Biotechnology, School of Life Sciences, University of Westminster, London, UK. ; Department of Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility, HRC-Fertility/Orange County, Newport Beach, CA, USA.
Gary S CollinsCentre for Statistics in Medicine, Wolfson College Annexe, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Christine A HawrylyshynDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology, The Sims Institute/Sims IVF, Dublin, Ireland. ; Department of Obstetrics and Gynacology, School of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Piotr SokolDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology, The Sims Institute/Sims IVF, Dublin, Ireland. ; Department of Obstetrics and Gynacology, School of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Anthony Ph WalshDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology, The Sims Institute/Sims IVF, Dublin, Ireland. ; Department of Obstetrics and Gynacology, School of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo measure Irish opinion on a range of assisted human reproduction (AHR) treatments.

methodsA nationally representative sample of Irish adults (n=1,003) were anonymously sampled by telephone survey.

resultsMost participants (77%) agreed that any fertility services offered internationally should also be available in Ireland, although only a small minority of the general Irish population had personal familiarity with AHR or infertility. This sample finds substantial agreement (63%) that the Government of Ireland should introduce legislation covering AHR. The range of support for gamete donation in Ireland ranged from 53% to 83%, depending on how donor privacy and disclosure policies are presented. For example, donation where the donor agrees to be contacted by the child born following donation, and anonymous donation where donor privacy is completely protected by law were supported by 68% and 66%, respectively. The least popular (53%) donor gamete treatment type appeared to be donation where the donor consents to be involved in the future life of any child born as a result of donor fertility treatment. Respondents in social class ABC1 (58%), age 18 to 24 (62%), age 25 to 34 (60%), or without children (61%) were more likely to favour this donor treatment policy in our sample.

conclusionThis is the first nationwide assessment of Irish public opinion on the advanced reproductive technologies since 2005. Access to a wide range of AHR treatment was supported by all subgroups studied. Public opinion concerning specific types of AHR treatment varied, yet general support for the need for national AHR legislation was reported by 63% of this national sample. Contemporary views on AHR remain largely consistent with the Commission for Assisted Human Reproduction recommendations from 2005, although further research is needed to clarify exactly how popular opinion on these issues has changed. It appears that legislation allowing for the full range of donation options (and not mandating disclosure of donor identity at a stipulated age) would better align with current Irish public opinion.

Indexed as

Assisted fertilityIn vitro fertilizationIrelandLegislationPublic policy

Identifiers

PMID24505563
PMCPMC3913896
OpenAlexW2168954837

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.