ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2021
Disparities among infertility patients regarding genetic carrier screening, sex selection, and gene editing.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward nutritional management among patients with gastrointestinal cancer: A cross-sectional study.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Article
- The effect of media aids in genetic carrier screening education among patients with infertility.F&S reports · 2025Article
- Exploring attitudes and experiences with reproductive genetic carrier screening among couples seeking medically assisted reproduction: a longitudinal survey study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Acceptance of genetic editing and of whole genome sequencing of human embryos by patients with infertility before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.Reproductive biomedicine online · 2023Article
- Article
- A review of disparities in access to infertility care and treatment outcomes among Hispanic women.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 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
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study is to evaluate the perspectives of infertility patients regarding genetic carrier screening, embryo sex selection, embryo research, and gene editing.
methodsAn anonymous 32-question survey was distributed electronically to all patients who seen at a single academic fertility center for at least one visit between June 2018 and September 2019. Survey questions evaluated patient perspectives on genetic carrier screening, embryo sex selection, embryo research, and gene editing.
resultsThere were 1460 survey responses (32.0% response rate). There were significant differences in the proportion of respondents receiving genetic carrier screening between racial groups, 73.1% of White, 45.5% of Black, 49.4% of Hispanic, and 62.8% of Asian respondents. The likelihood of having genetic carrier screening was also significantly influenced by respondent income, insurance status, and religion. Religion significantly influenced the acceptance of embryonic research and embryonic sex selection. While only 8.9% felt that genetically modifying embryos for physical traits should be allowed, 74.1% felt that genetic modification to correct disease should be allowed.
conclusionRacial, religious, and socioeconomic factors significantly impacted respondents' likelihood to have genetic carrier screening and views on embryo sex selection, embryo research, and gene editing. These findings highlight the importance of tailoring genetic counseling to the individual, acknowledging individual and cultural differences in agreement with genetic testing and emerging genetic therapies.
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.