ReviewUpsala journal of medical sciences2020
Surrogacy relationships: a critical interpretative review.
Review in Upsala journal of medical sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Bioethical Analysis of a Recent Case Regarding Surrogacy in Russia.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Sacrifice and solicitation: an empirical ethics study of egg provider blogs.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Navigating Structural Tensions: Australian Surrogacy Facilitators' Understanding on Children's Rights in Cross-Border Surrogacy.Asian bioethics review · 2026Article
- Wombs for rent: Exploring the motivations behind Ghanaian Women's decisions to become surrogate mothers.PloS one · 2026Article
- [A singular relationship: the bonds between gestational carriers and intended parents in surrogacy between Ukraine and Argentina].Salud colectiva · 2025Article
- 20 Years Since the Enactment of Italian Law No. 40/2004 on Medically Assisted Procreation: How It Has Changed and How It Could Change.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
- Mapping the path to domestic surrogacy: Identifying key facilitators and barriers in the Netherlands.PloS one · 2025Article
- 'It's all settled on the right page' surrogates' feelings and reflections of surrogacy two decades on.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Development and validation of the attitude towards Surrogacy Scale in a polish sample.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Article
- Commercial Surrogacy: An Overview.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2022Review
- Surrogacy and "Procreative Tourism". What Does the Future Hold from the Ethical and Legal Perspectives?Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Review
- Are we looking under the lamp although we know the lost key is somewhere else? Or is it just about the egg?Upsala journal of medical sciences · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Based on a critical interpretative review of existing qualitative research investigating accounts of 'lived experience' of surrogates and intended parents from a relational perspective, this article proposes a typology of surrogacy arrangements. The review is based on the analysis of 39 articles, which belong to a range of different disciplines (mostly sociology, social psychology, anthropology, ethnology, and gender studies). The number of interviews in each study range from as few as seven to over one hundred. Countries covered include Australia, Canada, Greece, India, Iran, Israel, Italy, Mexico, Norway, Russia, Sweden, UK, Ukraine, and the USA. Most studies focus only on surrogacy practices in one country (although often with intended parents from other countries), and some include several countries (e.g. interviewees from several countries or fieldwork in different field-sites). The proposed typology goes beyond the division between altruistic versus commercial, and traditional versus gestational surrogacy, in order to inform further research and to contribute to bioethical and policy debates on surrogacy in a transnational context. Four types of relations are identifiable: open, restricted, structured, and enmeshed. The criteria which influence these relationships are: the frequency and character of contact pre- and post-birth; expectations of both parties; the type of exchange involved in surrogacy arrangements; and cultural, legal, and economic contexts. The theoretical contribution of the article is to further the development of a relational justice approach to surrogacy.
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.