ArticleF&S reports2022
Pathways to fatherhood: clinical experiences with assisted reproductive technology in single and coupled intended fathers.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decision making of male same-sex couples pursuing pregnancy via assisted reproductive technology: a qualitative study.F&S reports · 2025Article
- Patient care practices for LGBTQ+ individuals in clinical genetics: A scoping review.Journal of genetic counseling · 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
- Reassuring outcomes for single and coupled gay men using assisted reproductive technology.F&S reports · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To explore the cycle characteristics and outcomes of single and coupled intended fathers (SCIFs) using assisted reproductive technology. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Multicenter, fertility practices from 2016 to 2020. Patients: In this study, cycles among SCIFs with access to fertility coverage from 2016 to 2020 were included. Interventions: None. Main Outcome Measures: Our primary outcome was live birth rate. The secondary outcomes included the number of embryos transferred, miscarriage rate, and incidence of multifetal birth. Results: Five single and 39 coupled intended fathers completed an in vitro fertilization cycle with a majority using egg donation and an agency-based gestational carrier (69.7%, 83/119). In most couples, both partners wanted to serve as the sperm source (64.4%, 29/45). The vast majority (97.7%, 43/44) also used preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy. Among the embryo transfer (ET) cycles (n = 27), most consisted of a single euploid ET (74.07%, 20/27), whereas the remaining consisted of a double euploid ET (25.92%, 7/27). The SCIFs had high rates of success, with a live birth rate of 85.19% (23/27). A mean of 1.26 ± 0.44 embryos were transferred, with a majority resulting in singleton birth (70.37%, 19/27). Conclusions: Our study of SCIFs using assisted reproductive technology in the United States demonstrates that this population shares similar preferences for sperm source and the use of preimplantation genetic testing. Clinical outcomes suggest that this population is successful at achieving a live birth when using egg donation and a gestational carrier.
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.