ArticleF&S reports2023
Preimplantation sex selection via in vitro fertilization: time for a reappraisal.
Article in F&S reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reproductive options and genetic testing for patients with an inherited cardiac disease.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2025Review
- Best quality vs. sex selection - an analysis of embryo selection preferences for patients undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy over a 10-year period.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Mapping ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT).Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, there has been rapid increase in the availability of elective sex selection via genetic testing of preimplantation embryos created through in vitro fertilization. We explore the standing of this ethically controversial practice in the context of a changing legal landscape after the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health decision by the US Supreme Court.
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.