ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2014
Artificial insemination with donor sperm (AID): heterogeneity in sperm banking facilities in a single country (Belgium).
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- ESHRE position paper: international limits on the number of offspring per gamete donor.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Factors influencing pregnancy outcome with special attention to modified slow-release insemination and a patient-centred approach in a donor insemination programme: a prospective cohort study.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2022Article
- Anonymous sperm donors' attitude towards donation and the release of identifying information.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2019Article
- Time has come to include Human Papillomavirus (HPV) testing in sperm donor banks.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2018Article
- Non-donors' attitudes towards sperm donation and their willingness to donate.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2018Article
- Feasibility of an altruistic sperm donation program in Canada: results from a population-based model.Reproductive health · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Due to the high inflow of foreign patients seeking cross-border reproductive care in Belgium and the increased number of lesbian couples and single women who call for artificial insemination with donor sperm (AID), Belgian sperm banks nowadays face a shortage in donor sperm. However, since there is no central registration system for sperm donors in Belgium, no figures are currently available supporting this statement. Therefore a study was performed to obtain a detailed overview of the sperm banking facilities in Belgium. Questionnaires were sent to all Belgian centres for assisted reproduction with laboratory facilities (n = 18) to report on their sperm banking methods. The results showed that 82% of the centres rely partially or completely on foreign donor sperm. Moreover, four of the thirteen centres that have their own sperm bank use imported donor sperm in > 95% AID cycles. Our results show that in 63% of the Belgian AID cycles imported Danish donor sperm is being used. Donor recruitment is mainly performed through the centre's website (61%) or by distributing flyers in the centre (46%) and 9 to 180 potential donors have been recruited per centre in 2013. Eventually, 15 to 50% of these candidate donors were accepted. Different criteria for donor acceptance are handled by the centres: donor age limits range from 18-25 to 36-46 years old, and thresholds for sperm normality differ considerably. We can conclude that a wide variation in methods associated with sperm banking is observed in Belgian centres.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25009728PMC4086017W2196133687What OpenQuestion holds
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.