Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39008824›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2024

Perspectives on sperm donor anonymity: insights from donor-conceived adults in Belgium.

Phyline Casteels, Julie Nekkebroeck, Herman Tournaye

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. FIGO position statement: Gamete donations.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Phyline CasteelsBrussels IVF Centre for Reproductive Medicine, UZ Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0009-0002-4412-8340
Julie NekkebroeckBrussels IVF Centre for Reproductive Medicine, UZ Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-3310-7141
Herman TournayeBrussels IVF Centre for Reproductive Medicine, UZ Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-9863-9309

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionAre donor-conceived adults in Belgium interested in obtaining donor information, and do these interests vary based on their family backgrounds? SUMMARY ANSWER: Donor-conceived adults express a significant interest in obtaining donor-related information, with the highest interest reported by offspring from heterosexual couples compared to those from lesbian couple-parented or single-parent families. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In Belgium, sperm donation is mainly anonymous, but the rise of direct-to-consumer genetic testing challenges this anonymity. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a cross-sectional study involving an online nationwide survey conducted from July 2022 to October 2023. Participants, aged 18 years and older and being aware of their anonymous sperm donor-conceived status, were recruited through various channels. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,

methodsA total of 203 participants were included: 62.6% grew up in heterosexual families with infertile fathers, 26.1% with lesbian couples, 8.4% with single parents, and 3.0% in various or diverse family structures. The survey was available in both French and Dutch and consisted of 43 questions, including a mix of yes/no questions and multiple-choice items. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The average age of disclosure was 16.5 years, with notably later disclosure in heterosexual couple-parented households. A substantial 82.8% of donor-conceived individuals expressed a keen interest in obtaining non-personally identifiable donor information, while 69% were curious about personally identifiable donor data. Furthermore, 61.6% conveyed a desire for personal contact with their donors, and 26.6% advocated for the inclusion of the donor's name on their birth certificates. Participants raised in lesbian two-parent families exhibited the lowest level of interest in donor-related information compared with those raised in other family structures. An overwhelming 90.1% wondered about the possibility of having half-siblings from the same sperm donor. Analysis of survey responses on DNA database registration revealed that 55.2% of donor-conceived offspring were already registered, with 68.8% discovering the same donor offspring and 30.4% successfully locating their donors. Compared to individuals from other family structures, those raised in heterosexual couple-parented households exhibit a less positive attitude toward their conception through anonymous sperm donation. About 61.6% of donor-conceived individuals reported experiencing distinct emotions compared to their peers, while 44.1% encountered psychological difficulties related to anonymous sperm donation, primarily attributed to late disclosure. The majority supported the idea of informing the donor about the number of children he facilitated to conceive. Lastly, the study highlighted that 21.2% of donor-conceived adults considered becoming donors themselves, and 31.3% expressed willingness to use an anonymous donor whenever faced with fertility challenges. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our sample size may not fully represent all adults conceived through anonymous sperm donation in Belgium. Participation bias may have influenced the results, especially due to the overrepresentation of participants from heterosexual couples. Additionally, an association exists between individuals raised by heterosexual couples and late disclosure, complicating the analysis by introducing a confounding factor. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsThe findings of this study contribute to a better understanding of the needs and preferences of donor-conceived adults, with significant potential impact on patient education and healthcare policy. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Study funding was not obtained for this research. There are no conflicts of interest to disclose. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Indexed as

Tissue DonorsAdolescentAdultBelgiumConfidentialityCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHeterosexualityHomosexuality, FemaleHumansInsemination, Artificial, HeterologousMaleMiddle AgedSexual and Gender MinoritiesSpermatozoaSurveys and Questionnairesdisclosuredonordonor anonymitydonor conceptiondonor insemination

Identifiers

PMID39008824
PMCPMC11373337

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.