ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2021
Pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: motivations, concerns, and perceptions in a UK population.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Melatonin improved the outcomes of women with ART: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Pooled it
- Opportunities to optimize patient experience in the in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinic and the role of genetic counselors.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 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
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) is a technique used as part of in vitro fertilisation to improve outcomes. Despite the upward trend in women utilising PGT-A, data on women's motivations and concerns toward using the technology, and perceptions having undergone the process, remain scarce.
methodsThis cross-sectional survey, based at a fertility clinic in the UK, utilised an electronic questionnaire to assess the motivations of women who undergo PGT-A and their perceptions and attitudes toward PGT-A after using it.
resultsOne hundred sixty-one women responded. The most significant motivating factors to undergo PGT-A were to improve the probability of having a baby per cycle (9.0 ± 2.1) and enhance the chance of implantation (8.8 ± 2.5). The least important motivations were reducing the number of embryos transferred per cycle (2.7 ± 3.3) and saving money by reducing the number of procedures required (4.6 ± 3.4). The most significant concerning factors identified included not having embryos to transfer (5.7 ± 3.4) and the potential for embryo damage (5.2 ± 3.3). The least concerning factors included religious (0.6 ± 1.7) or moral (1 ± 2.2) concerns. The majority of women were satisfied/very satisfied following treatment (n = 109; 68%). The proportion of those who were satisfied/very satisfied increased to 94.2% (n = 81) following a successful outcome, and reduced to 43.5% (n = 27) in those who had an unsuccessful outcome or had not undergone embryo transfer (p < 0.001).
conclusionThis study highlights that perceptions amongst women who use PGT-A are mostly positive. We also demonstrate a significant association between satisfaction and reproductive outcomes, with those who achieve a live birth reporting more positive perceptions toward PGT-A.
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.