Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31463872›Full record

ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2019

Anonymous sperm donors' attitude towards donation and the release of identifying information.

F Mahieu, W Decleer, K Osmanagaoglu, V Provoost

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. University students' opinion on gamete donor identification regimes.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023
    Observational
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

F MahieuDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, AZ Jan Palfijn Hospital, Henri Dunantlaan 5, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. Frederik.mahieu@janpalfijngent.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6152-011X
W DecleerDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, AZ Jan Palfijn Hospital, Henri Dunantlaan 5, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
K OsmanagaogluDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, AZ Jan Palfijn Hospital, Henri Dunantlaan 5, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
V ProvoostBioethics Institute Ghent, Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionBelgian legislation allows only strictly anonymous gamete donation and known donation (donation to a recipient known by the donor). Recently, an amendment of the legislation was proposed to grant donor offspring, as of 18 years old, the right to claim identifying information about their donor. PURPOSE: The aim is to explore the attitude of actual sperm donors towards donation and the release of identifying information and to investigate which donors would be willing to donate when anonymity would be prohibited by law.

methodsAll men who were accepted as sperm donors (n = 242) by AZ Jan Palfijn Hospital (Ghent, Belgium) were invited to complete an anonymous online survey. The response rate was 65.5%.

resultsOne in five (20.1%; n = 30) would continue sperm donation upon a legislation change towards identifiable donation. Three in four donors (75.2%) would agree to provide basic non-identifiable information about themselves and one in three (32.9%) would provide extra non-identifiable information such as a baby photo or a personal letter. Almost half of the donors (45.6%) would agree to donate in a system where the hospital can trace the donor at the child's request and contact the donor, leaving it to the donor to decide whether or not to have contact with the requesting donor child.

conclusionThese findings show that only one in five current donors would continue to donate when identifiable. The study also demonstrates that current donors think more positive about alternative options and that nearly half of them are willing to be contacted by the hospital at the donor child's request, providing the donor can decide at that time whether or not to release his identity.

Indexed as

Tissue and Organ ProcurementAdolescentAdultAttitudeFamilyHumansMaleSpermatozoaSurveys and QuestionnairesTissue DonorsAnonymityAttitudeDisclosureDonor conceptionMotivationSemen donor

Identifiers

PMID31463872
PMCPMC6823408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.