ArticleJournal of women's health (2002)2018
Outcomes for Gestational Carriers Versus Traditional Surrogates in the United States.
Article in Journal of women's health (2002), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Obstetric Characteristics and Outcomes of Gestational Carrier Pregnancies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- The outcomes of surrogate pregnancy using donor egg compared to surrogate's egg: a systematic review.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Mapping the path to domestic surrogacy: Identifying key facilitators and barriers in the Netherlands.PloS one · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about the obstetric and procedural outcomes of traditional surrogates and gestational carriers. MATERIALS AND
methodsParticipants included 222 women living in the United States who completed a brief online survey between November 2015 and February 2016. Differences between gestational carriers (n = 204) and traditional surrogates (n = 18) in demographic characteristics, pregnancy outcomes, and procedural outcomes were examined using chi-squared tests, Fisher's exact tests, and t-tests.
resultsOut of 248 eligible respondents, 222 surveys were complete, for a response rate of 89.5%. Overall, obstetric outcomes were similar among gestational carriers and traditional surrogates. Traditional surrogates were more likely than gestational carriers to have a Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale Revised score of 16 or higher (37.5% vs. 4.0%). Gestational carriers reported higher mean compensation ($27,162.80 vs. $17,070.07) and were more likely to travel over 400 miles (46.0% vs. 0.0%) than traditional surrogates.
conclusionsProcedural differences, but not differences in obstetric outcomes, emerged between gestational carriers and traditional surrogates. To ensure that both traditional surrogates and gestational carriers receive optimal medical care, it may be necessary to extend practice guidelines to ensure that traditional surrogates are offered the same level of care offered to gestational carriers.
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.