ReviewPrenatal diagnosis2022
A new ethical framework to determine acceptable risks in fetal therapy trials.
Review in Prenatal diagnosis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ethical challenges in conducting maternal-fetal surgery trials. A systematic review.Pediatric research · 2025Pooled it
- In Utero Molecular-Targeted Drug Therapies: Translational Principles, Pharmacologic Considerations, and Emerging Clinical Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- The Expanding Role of Gene Sequencing in Shaping Fetal Therapies: Clinical and Ethical Considerations.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Review
- Ethical issues in fetal therapies of life-threatening malformations.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Review
- Precarious hope: Ethical considerations for offering experimental fetal therapies outside of research after initial studies in humans.Prenatal diagnosis · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveFetal therapy trials pose complex ethical challenges because risks and benefits to both fetuses and pregnant persons must be considered. Existing regulatory guidance is limited and many proposed ethical frameworks have unnecessarily restrictive criteria that would block the development and implementation of important new fetal therapies. We aimed to develop a new ethical framework for assessing the risks and benefits of fetal therapy trials.
methodsWe reviewed existing regulatory and ethical guidance on fetal therapy trials. We used conceptual analysis to design a new ethical framework, which is grounded in general ethical principles for clinical research.
resultsWe propose a new framework for assessing the risks and benefits of fetal therapy trials. We suggest that the potential benefits of a fetal therapy trial - for the fetus, the pregnant person, and society - should outweigh the risks for the fetus and the pregnant person. Furthermore, the risk-benefit profile for just the fetus and the risk-benefit profile for just the pregnant person should be appropriate.
conclusionsWe hope that this new framework will permit important studies while protecting pregnant persons and fetuses from disproportionate harms.
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.