ArticleReproductive biomedicine online2023
Acceptance of genetic editing and of whole genome sequencing of human embryos by patients with infertility before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Reproductive biomedicine online, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Public opinion survey on heritable human genome editing in South Africa: a study protocol.Global health action · 2026Article
- Decision-making criteria in polygenic embryo screening: A survey of reproductive medicine physicians.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2026Article
- Ethical and social implications of implementing polygenic embryo screening into clinical care: A scoping review.Genetics in medicine open · 2026Review
- Survey of U.S. reproductive medicine clinicians' attitudes on polygenic embryo screening.NPJ genomic medicine · 2025Article
- A decade of public engagement regarding human germline gene editing: a systematic scoping review.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Article
- Patient perspectives after receiving simulated preconception polygenic risk scores (PRS) for family planning.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Screening embryos for polygenic disease risk: a review of epidemiological, clinical, and ethical considerations.Human reproduction update · 2024Review
- Public Attitudes, Interests, and Concerns Regarding Polygenic Embryo Screening.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Patient interest in and clinician reservations on polygenic embryo screening: a qualitative study of stakeholder perspectives.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Divergence Between Clinician and Patient Perspectives on Polygenic Embryo Screening: A Qualitative Study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
research questionHas acceptance of heritable genome editing (HGE) and whole genome sequencing for preimplantation genetic testing (PGT-WGS) of human embryos changed after the onset of COVID-19 among infertility patients?
designA written survey conducted between April and June 2018 and July and December 2021 among patients at a university-affiliated infertility practice. The questionnaire ascertained the acceptance of HGE for specific therapeutic or genetic 'enhancement' indications and of PGT-WGS to prevent adult disease.
resultsIn 2021 and 2018, 172 patients and 469 patients (response rates: 90% and 91%, respectively) completed the questionnaire. In 2021, significantly more participants reported a positive attitude towards HGE, for therapeutic and enhancement indications. In 2021 compared with 2018, respondents were more likely to use HGE to have healthy children with their own gametes (85% versus 77%), to reduce disease risk for adult-onset polygenic disorders (78% versus 67%), to increase life expectancy (55% versus 40%), intelligence (34% versus 26%) and creativity (33% versus 24%). Fifteen per cent of the 2021 group reported a more positive attitude towards HGE because of COVID-19 and less than 1% a more negative attitude. In contrast, support for PGT-WGS was similar in 2021 and 2018.
conclusionsA significantly increased acceptance of HGE was observed, but not of PGT-WGS, after the onset of COVID-19. Although the pandemic may have contributed to this change, the exact reasons remain unknown and warrant further investigation. Whether increased acceptability of HGE may indicate an increase in acceptability of emerging biomedical technologies in general needs further investigation.
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.