Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33604456›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction open2021

The ethics of preconception expanded carrier screening in patients seeking assisted reproduction.

Guido de Wert, Sanne van der Hout, Mariëtte Goddijn, Rita Vassena, Lucy Frith, Nathalie Vermeulen, Ursula Eichenlaub-Ritter, ESHRE Ethics Committee

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Application of clinical exome sequencing in sperm donor screening in China.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Guido de WertDepartment of Health, Ethics and Society; CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University; and GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4052-7192
Sanne van der HoutDepartment of Health, Ethics and Society; CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University; and GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2128-2951
Mariëtte GoddijnCentre for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Rita VassenaClinica EUGIN, Carrer de Balmes 236, Barcelona 08006, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0846-0365
Lucy FrithDepartment of Public Health, Policy & Systems, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8506-0699
Nathalie VermeulenESHRE, Central office, Meerstraat 60, 1852 Grimbergen, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8046-6799
Ursula Eichenlaub-RitterUniversitat Bielefeld, Fakultat fur Biologie, D-33501 Bielefeld, Germany.
ESHRE Ethics Committee
Maastricht University · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLBielefeld University · DEUniversity of Liverpool · GBEuropean Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Expanded carrier screening (ECS) entails a screening offer for carrier status for multiple recessive disorders simultaneously and allows testing of couples or individuals regardless of ancestry or geographic origin. Although universal ECS-referring to a screening offer for the general population-has generated considerable ethical debate, little attention has been given to the ethics of preconception ECS for patients applying for assisted reproduction using their own gametes. There are several reasons why it is time for a systematic reflection on this practice. Firstly, various European fertility clinics already offer preconception ECS on a routine basis, and others are considering such a screening offer. Professionals involved in assisted reproduction have indicated a need for ethical guidance for ECS. Secondly, it is expected that patients seeking assisted reproduction will be particularly interested in preconception ECS, as they are already undertaking the physical, emotional and economic burdens of such reproduction. Thirdly, an offer of preconception ECS to patients seeking assisted reproduction raises particular ethical questions that do not arise in the context of universal ECS: the professional's involvement in the conception implies that both parental and professional responsibilities should be taken into account. This paper reflects on and provides ethical guidance for a responsible implementation of preconception ECS to patients seeking assisted reproduction using their own gametes by assessing the proportionality of such a screening offer: do the possible benefits clearly outweigh the possible harms and disadvantages? If so, for what kinds of disorders and under what conditions?

Indexed as

assisted reproductionethicsexpanded carrier screeninggenetic testingnon-invasive prenatal diagnosisproportionalityscreening offer

Identifiers

PMID33604456
PMCPMC7880037
OpenAlexW3130855692

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.