Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36865469›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

Ethical issues surrounding the use of assisted reproductive technologies in Ghana: An analysis of the experiences of clients and service providers.

Rosemond Akpene Hiadzi, Bryan Woodward, Godwin Banafo Akrong

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Rosemond Akpene HiadziDepartment of Sociology, University of Ghana, Ghana.
Bryan WoodwardX & Y Fertility, Leicester, UK.
Godwin Banafo AkrongSchool of Management and Economics, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 611731, China.
Oxford Fertility · GBUniversity of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CNUniversity of Ghana · GH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the advent of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) in Ghana about three decades ago, IVF and ICSI treatments have enabled infertile Ghanaian couples to fulfill their aspirations and dreams of having children. In this extremely pronatalist society, ART has provided relief to many childless couples by reducing, if not eliminating, the shame of childlessness that they would otherwise have to suffer. However, as the provision and utilization of ART continue to increase, so do worries regarding the ethical difficulties surrounding this field of medicine, which challenge cultural ideals and personal desires. The study explores client and service provider experiences with ART in urban Ghana. Observation and in-depth interviews were employed to collect data, and the ethical dimensions of people's experiences relative to Ghanaian cultural and ethical values were analyzed. The results show that the provision of ART services for heterosexual couples in marital unions, the availability of PGT for sickle cell clients, the preference for multiple births emerging from embryo transfers, the lower preference for cryopreservation, the high cost of ART treatment, and the need for regulation of the provision of ART services in Ghana were some of the ethical concerns expressed by both clients and service providers.

Indexed as

Assisted reproductive technologiesCultural valuesEthicsGhanaInfertility

Identifiers

PMID36865469
PMCPMC9970979
OpenAlexW4320912677

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.