ArticleF&S reports2022
Pathways to fatherhood: evaluating the priorities of self-identified gay and bisexual men pursuing family building options.
Article in F&S reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decision making of male same-sex couples pursuing pregnancy via assisted reproductive technology: a qualitative study.F&S reports · 2025Article
- A Mixed-Methods Study to Evaluate Family Planning Desires and Barriers to Building Families Among Gay, Bisexual, and Lesbian Cisgender Military Service Members.Military medicine · 2025Article
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 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To assess the priorities and decisions of gay and bisexual men pursuing fatherhood. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Internet-based survey. Patients: Gay and bisexual men who were interested in pursuing or had previously pursued family building options. Interventions: None. Main Outcome Measures: This study aimed to assess the attitudes of respondents regarding the following: mode of achieving parenthood and the relative importance of a genetic link to offspring; the relative importance of factors considered when selecting an oocyte donor (OD); and the relative importance of factors associated with selecting a gestational carrier (GC). Access to care and financial considerations were also analyzed. Results: Of the 110 respondents, most (68.2%) desired parenthood via an OD and GC. This was consistent with 53.2% of respondents reporting that a genetic link to a child was "extremely important" or "important." Most couples (86.6%) desired to use sperm from both partners. In addition, 40.5% of respondents reported that a twin gestation would be the most ideal pregnancy outcome. Medical history was considered the most important factor when selecting an OD (83.5%), whereas pregnancy history was considered the most important selection criterion for a GC (86.2%). Furthermore, 89.1% of respondents reported that the fertility services they desired were available to them, although 33.0% reported they would have to travel to another state for care. Conclusions: Understanding the circumstances of gay and bisexual men pursuing fatherhood allows for individualized care. Since several respondents desired twin pregnancies, it is important to counsel patients regarding the risks of multiple gestation and determine the motivations for this preference.
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.