ArticleCureus2021
Preimplantation Genetic Testing: A Perceptual Study From the Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia.
Article in Cureus, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Congenital glaucoma prevention program-Evaluation of patient knowledge and acceptance of genetic screening.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Reproductive options and genetic testing for patients with an inherited cardiac disease.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2025Review
- Public's perception and attitude toward genetic testing in Jazan region.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChromosomal abnormalities affect many children which lead to high rates of morbidity and mortality among them. So, preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) is an evolving technology used to detect a specific genetic disorder in embryos of a couple known to be carriers or affected by a specific mutation. Similarly, it could be used in advanced maternal age which is a high risk of chromosomal abnormalities. Although PGT is a solution for many inherited chromosomal disorders, many ethical dilemmas surround its application. Thus, the aim of this study is to evaluate the community awareness and acceptance of PGT which will eventually lead to a healthier society through disease-free babies in Eastern Province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). METHODOLOGY: A qualitative cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted within the population of the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire was designed in Arabic and distributed electronically through social media platforms.
resultsThe study included 837 participants, whose ages ranged from 18 to 65 years with the mean age 33.5 ± 11.9 years. Good awareness and acceptance were detected among 53.7% of the old aged group (50 years or more) compared to 39.5% of the young age group. Also, 44.9% of female participants had good awareness in comparison to 34.2% of males (p=.033). Participants with a higher number of children had significantly higher awareness and acceptance of PGT. Also, 44.3% of participants who knew someone in need of assisted reproductive technology, had good awareness and acceptance levels compared to 36.9% of those who did not (p=.033).
conclusionThe perception of Eastern Province's Saudi citizens toward PGT is found to be low. Increasing their perception toward such technology is needed as it is known that many chromosomal abnormalities are prevalent among this population, particularly sickle cell disease. Achieving this goal will eventually lead to decrease the burden of prevalent inherited diseases. Since Saudis' opinions are almost influenced by cultural and religious points of view, care should be given to these aspects.
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.