ReviewJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024
Polygenic embryo screening: quo vadis?
Review in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- PEStimate: predicting offspring disease risk after polygenic embryo screening.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Modeling polygenic embryo screening in real-world IVF patients demonstrates limitations on efficacy.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Beyond the score: the imperative of comprehensive counseling in polygenic embryo screening.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Ethical and social implications of implementing polygenic embryo screening into clinical care: A scoping review.Genetics in medicine open · 2026Review
- Implementation readiness of artificial intelligence inFrontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- Article
- Social and Behavioral Genomics: On the Ethics of the Research and Its Downstream Applications.Annual review of genomics and human genetics · 2025Review
- Patient perspectives after receiving simulated preconception polygenic risk scores (PRS) for family planning.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Emerging and evolving values in the changing landscape of genomics.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Recently, the use of polygenic risk scores in embryo screening (PGT-P) has been introduced on the premise of reducing polygenic disease risk through embryo selection. However, it has been met with extensive critique: considered "technology-driven" rather than "evidence-based", concerns exist about its validity, utility, ethics, and societal effects. Its scientific foundations and criticisms thus need to be carefully considered. However, seeing as PGT-P is already offered in some settings, further questions need to be addressed, in order to give due diligence to various aspects of PGT-P. By examining the complexities of clinical introduction of PGT-P, we discuss whether PGT-P could be responsibly implemented in the first place, what elements need to be addressed if PGT-P is clinically implemented, and subsequently how counselling and decision-making of its users could be envisaged. By dissecting these elements, we provide an overview of important practical questions of PGT-P and emphasize elements of PGT-P that we think have yet to be given sufficient attention. These questions and elements are for example related to the potential target group, scope, and decision-making possibilities of PGT-P. The aspects we raise are crucial to consider by the scientific community and policy makers for the development of guidelines and/or an ethical framework for PGT-P.
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.