ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2021
More than the oocyte source, egg donors as patients: a national picture of United States egg donors.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Can Cryopreservation in Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Induce Epigenetic Changes to Gametes and Embryos?Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Egg donor self-reports of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: severity by trigger type, oocytes retrieved, and prior history.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- Fertility after Curative Therapy for Sickle Cell Disease: A Comprehensive Review to Guide Care.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo characterize national oocyte donation practice patterns from the perspective of individual donors rather than of recipients.
methodsRetrospective cohort including all donor oocyte retrievals and transfers reported to SARTCORS in 2016 and 2017 in the USA. Primary outcomes include characteristics of oocyte donors and of donor oocyte cycles. Secondary outcomes include overall pregnancy rates, elective single embryo transfer (eSET) rates, and perinatal outcomes among donor oocyte recipient transfers.
resultsDuring the study period, 49,193 donor oocyte retrievals were performed, of which the largest proportion were in the Western US. For all reported retrievals, there were 17,099 unique donors, each of whom underwent an average of 2.4 retrievals (range 1-22). Average donor age was 26.3 years (range 18-48). On average, 24.6 oocytes (SD 12.4) were retrieved each cycle, ranging from 0 to 102. Among 37,657 donor oocyte recipient transfers, 20,159 (53.5%) involved eSET, and 17,725 (47.1%) resulted in live birth. Miscarriage rates were 17.5%, and good perinatal outcome (GPO), defined as full-term normal birthweight delivery, was more likely among singleton (75.7%) than multiple (23.8%) pregnancies.
conclusionThe average number of retrievals that donors underwent and oocyte yield mirrored national guidelines; however outliers, exist that may unnecessarily increase donor risk. Additionally, among resultant donor transfers, 46.5% transferred more than one embryo despite national recommendations for eSET. The significantly higher likelihood of GPO among singleton pregnancies points to the need to further increase donor recipient eSET rates.
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.