ArticleFertility and sterility2016
Screening of gestational carriers in the United States.
Article in Fertility and sterility, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reduction in multiple pregnancy rate in donor oocyte-recipient gestational carrier (GC) in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles in the USA with single-embryo transfer and preimplantation genetic testing.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
- Reproductive and sexual Health of surrogate mothers, developing a care program: a protocol for mixed methods study.Reproductive health · 2019Article
- Outcomes for Gestational Carriers Versus Traditional Surrogates in the United States.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2018Article
- "One for Sorrow, Two for Joy?": American embryo transfer guideline recommendations, practices, and outcomes for gestational surrogate patients.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess medical and psychosocial screening and evaluation received by gestational carriers and compare those using agencies to those not using agencies.
designCross-sectional questionnaire.
settingNot applicable. PATIENT(S): A total of 204 women who completed a survey on their experiences as gestational carriers in the United States. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Self-reported screening received before gestational carrier pregnancies. RESULT(S): Overall, 97.1% of gestational carriers had a complete medical evaluation and 94.6% had an evaluation or counseling by a mental health professional. Most participants indicated that they had been informed of at least some medical risks (92.6%) and psychological considerations (89.7%). Participants most often recalled being informed of the risks of multiple pregnancy (89.2%) and medical procedures and medications (87.2%), but least often recalled being informed about the risks of impact on their own employment (46.6%) and to their own children (61.3%). There were no differences in outcome measures between those using an agency and those who did not. CONCLUSION(S): Self-reported screening and evaluation was high, but still not 100% on all measures. Further education of providers regarding guidelines for the screening and evaluation of gestational carriers may be needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.