ReviewJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2023
Mapping ethical, legal, & social implications (ELSI) of assisted reproductive technologies.
Review in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical nursing strategies for ART in intellectual disability: tools and systemic pathways.Nursing ethics · 2026Article
- Article
- Mapping Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) of gamete donation.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Review
- Mapping ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of fertility preservation.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Review
- Tackling real-world issues in human ARTs-the missing link between stakeholders.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeA significant portion of the research on assisted reproductive technologies explores ethical, legal, and social implications. It has an impact on social perceptions, the evolution of norms of clinical practices, regulations and public funding. This paper reviews and maps the geographical distribution to test the hypothesis of geographical concentration and classifies the output by fields and topics.
methodsWe queried PubMed, Scopus and the Web of Science for documents published between 1999 and 2019, excluding clinical trials and medical case reports. Documents were analyzed according to their titles, abstracts and keywords and were classified to assisted reproductive fields and by Topic Modeling. We analyzed geographic distribution.
resultsResearch output increased nearly tenfold. We show a trend towards decentralization of research, although at a slower rate compared with clinical assisted reproduction research. While the U.S. and the U.K.'s share has dropped, North America and Western Europe are still responsible for more than 70%, while China and Japan had limited participation in the global discussion. Fertility preservation and surrogacy have emerged as the most researched categories, while research about genetics was less prominent.
conclusionsWe call to enrich researchers' perspectives by addressing local issues in ways that are tailored to local cultural values, social and economic contexts, and differently structured healthcare systems. Researchers from wealthy centers should conduct international research, focusing on less explored regions and topics. More research on financial issues and access is required, especially regarding regions with limited public funding.
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.