ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2021
The effect of donor and recipient race on outcomes of assisted reproduction.
Article in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Moving toward Narrowing the United States Gap in Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Next Decade.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Ambient traffic related air pollution in relation to ovarian reserve and oocyte quality in young, healthy oocyte donors.Environment international · 2024Article
- Air pollution and fecundability in a North American preconception cohort study.Environment international · 2023Article
- Inequities in Medically Assisted Reproduction: a Scoping Review.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2023Article
- Primary ovarian insufficiency: a glimpse into the racial and socioeconomic disparities found within third-party reproduction.F&S reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA growing literature suggests that minority races, particularly Black women, have a lower probability of live birth and higher risk of perinatal complications after autologous assisted reproductive technology. However, questions still remain as to whether these racial disparities have arisen because of associations between race and oocyte/embryo quality, the uterine environment, or a combination of the two. Oocyte donation assisted reproductive technology represents a unique approach to examine this question.
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the associations between the race of female oocyte donors and recipients and live birth rates following vitrified donor oocyte assisted reproductive technologies. STUDY
designThis was a retrospective study conducted at a single, private fertility clinic that included 327 oocyte donors and 899 recipients who underwent 1601 embryo transfer cycles (2008-2015). Self-reported race of the donor and recipient were abstracted from medical records. Live birth was defined as the delivery of at least 1 live-born neonate. We used multivariable cluster weighted generalized estimating equations with binomial distribution and log link function to estimate the adjusted risk ratios of live birth, adjusting for donor age and body mass index, recipient age and body mass index, tubal and uterine factor infertility, and year of oocyte retrieval.
resultsThe racial profile of our donors and recipients were similar: 73% white, 13% Black, 4% Hispanic, 8% Asian, and 2% other. Women who received oocytes from Hispanic donors had a significantly higher probability of live birth (adjusted risk ratio, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.36) than women who received oocytes from white donors. Among Hispanic recipients, however, there was no significant difference in probability of live birth compared with white recipients (adjusted risk ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.26). Embryo transfer cycles using oocytes from Black donors (adjusted risk ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.03) and Black recipients (adjusted risk ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.99) had a lower probability of live birth than white donors and white recipients, respectively. There were no significant differences in the probability of live birth among Hispanic, Asian, and other race recipients compared with white recipients.
conclusionBlack female recipients had a lower probability of live birth following assisted reproductive technology, even when using vitrified oocytes from healthy donors. Female recipients who used vitrified oocytes from Hispanic donors had a higher probability of live birth regardless of their own race.
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.