Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35024472›Full record

ArticleReproductive biomedicine & society online2022

Enthusiasm, concern and ambivalence in the Belgian public's attitude towards in-vitro gametogenesis.

Heidi Mertes, Tina Goethals, Seppe Segers, Marie Huysentruyt, Guido Pennings, Veerle Provoost

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive biomedicine & society online, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Heidi MertesDepartment of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Tina GoethalsDepartment of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Seppe SegersDepartment of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Marie HuysentruytDepartment of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Guido PenningsDepartment of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Veerle ProvoostDepartment of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Ghent University · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the controversial nature of research into in-vitro gametogenesis (IVG), this study set out to investigate the current attitudes towards IVG in the general Belgian population in order to anticipate potential future barriers and misunderstandings. A questionnaire was developed and incorporated into a web-based online survey and sent out to Belgians aged ≥ 18 years in September 2018 until a representative sample (by age, gender and region) of 1000 participants was reached. Respondents expressed an overall positive attitude towards IVG and its possible future applications, with the exception of the use of IVG in postmenopausal women. They were ambivalent about the importance of genetic parenthood and about the necessary experiments on animals and embryos to bring IVG to the clinic. While the willingness to accept greater risks for IVG than for other assisted reproductive technology treatments was low (17.5%), the use of spare in-vitro fertilization embryos to study those risks was acceptable for 55.8% of participants; embryo creation was acceptable for 38.1%; and experiments on mice and monkeys were acceptable for 45.3% and 30.4%, respectively. Finally, 85.6% of participants agreed that the Belgian Government should strictly regulate IVG. In conclusion, preclinical research into IVG and other reproductive technologies elicits a great diversity of attitudes towards the importance of genetic parenthood and the acceptability of embryo and animal research. There is a need for public dialogue on these topics.

Indexed as

Assisted reproductionGenetic parenthoodIn-vitro gametogenesisIVGPublic attitudesReproductive ethics

Identifiers

PMID35024472
PMCPMC8732790
OpenAlexW3216277283

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.