ArticleF&S reports2023
Management considerations for clinically relevant findings on expanded carrier screening in a sperm donor applicant population.
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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Protecting the health of donor-conceived offspring.Familial cancer · 2026Article
- Incidental Identification of Potentially Affected Individuals Through Expanded Carrier Screening During Preconception or Early Pregnancy.Prenatal diagnosis · 2025Article
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To describe the clinical experience of managing expanded carrier screening (ECS) results in sperm donor applicants at a sperm bank in the United States, including considerations around suitability determination and appropriate education of prospective donors and recipients. Design: A retrospective review of donor genetic screening records from July 2017 to December 2021. Setting: A U.S.-based sperm bank. Patients: Donor applicants at a sperm bank. Intervention: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: To examine the rate of potentially significant health risks on the basis of ECS results to inform donor management and donor/recipient counseling considerations. Results: Nearly 2% of donor applicants were identified as having potentially significant health risks on the basis of their ECS results, and most individuals had no clinical manifestations related to these findings. Conclusion: There are unique challenges related to ECS in third-party reproduction for gamete providers, recipients, and their healthcare providers. A collaborative, multidisciplinary approach is necessary to help mitigate risks to donor offspring and maximize patient experience. Informed consent and access to a trained genetics professional are paramount when facilitating ECS on donor applicants and disseminating results to recipients.
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.