ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2016
Acceptance and Disclosure: Comparing genetic symmetry and genetic asymmetry in heterosexual couples between egg recipients and embryo recipients.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 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.
- Parents' disclosure to their donor-conceived children in the last 10 years and factors affecting disclosure: a narrative review.Human reproduction update · 2024Review
- The influence of expanded carrier screening in assisted reproductive techniques: changed the 'game'- review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Good practice recommendations for information provision for those involved in reproductive donationHuman reproduction open · 2022Article
- "Making the child mine": Mothers' thoughts and feelings about the mother-infant relationship in egg donation families.Journal of family psychology : JFP : journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43) · 2020Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper explores the attitudes and experiences of 203 women in heterosexual couples who conceived via donated eggs (145) or donated embryos (58) in the last 5 years. Online surveys were sent to former patients (from many different countries) of a private Spanish clinic. By comparing the women in heterosexual couples who relied on donated eggs with those who relied on donated embryos, we examined the meaning of the absence of a genetic tie to a child in the two different situations - that of "genetic symmetry" where neither parent has a genetic tie to that of "genetic asymmetry" where only the mother does not have a genetic tie. No existing study has yet shown whether women who rely on donated eggs and women who rely on donated embryos have similar or different attitudes towards issues surrounding the experience of non-genetic motherhood. Three issues are discussed: (1) attitudes toward the importance of genetic ties and genetic information from the donor before and after the birth of their children, (2) patterns of disclosure, and (3) the relationship between attitudes toward genetic information and disclosure decisions. This study showed that although the two groups of women have many of the same attitudes, including attitudes toward the importance of genes as determinants of outcomes for the child, egg recipients are more likely than embryo recipients to agree that the genetic origins are important to them and that their children have a right to know genetic information. We also found that those who conceived with donated eggs more frequently disclose the nature of their conception to their child than do those who conceived with donated embryos.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27822347PMC5096423W2565184833What 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.