ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2024
Permanently infertile couples and family building-a cross-sectional survey in Denmark.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
study questionWhich decision-making factors influence family building among permanently infertile couples? SUMMARY ANSWER: Ethical, legal, and financial considerations outweigh genetic relatedness in decision-making, favouring domestic gestational surrogacy, if this were possible, over international options. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Permanent infertility affects 4-5% of people in the fertile age. Their family-building options include adoption, surrogacy, uterus transplantation, foster care, and intentional multiple parenthood. However, in most countries, including Denmark, legal barriers constrain these methods due to surrogacy restrictions, suspended international adoptions, and the experimental status of uterus transplantation. Despite existing research on surrogacy, adoption, and specific causes of permanent infertility, a significant gap remains in our understanding of how couples with permanent infertility make family-building decisions within these limited frameworks. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This cross-sectional study with 150 permanently infertile Danish participants was conducted from June to November 2023 using an online questionnaire. Multiple strategies, such as online forums, fertility clinics, hospital departments, and snowballing, were used to recruit a diverse sample. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,
methodsThe study included couples aged 26-50 years facing permanent infertility due to the following primary causes: women without a uterus (15%), women with a non-functional uterus (47%) or women for whom pregnancy would be life-threatening (9%), male couples (16%), transgender partner couples (2%), and other causes (11%). The survey collected data on demographics, reproductive history, family-building choices, and communication strategies. Closed questions were analysed using descriptive statistics. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Among 150 respondents, 41% had used transnational surrogacy, 27% adoption, 14% chose to remain childless, and 19% were undecided. Critical factors on family-building decisions were ethical, legal, and financial concerns which ranked higher than genetic relatedness. Despite the complexity of family building, most participants were open about their child's origin and received social support. If all family-building methods were legal and available in Denmark, domestic gestational surrogacy would be the preferred method, with uterus transplantation and remaining childless being least popular. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The sample size is relatively small, despite the use of a variety of recruitment strategies. Nevertheless, this has ensured a diverse cohort representing the different reasons for infertility and family-building choices. It is important to note that the strategies may have favoured individuals achieving parenthood. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
findingsThe finding of our study reveals a notable gap between available family-building options in Denmark and the preferences of couples facing permanent infertility. These insights could be instrumental for organizations reviewing and developing family-building frameworks. Furthermore, for healthcare professionals guiding couples experiencing infertility issues in their attempts to build a family, an understanding of these preferences is essential to facilitate informed decisions about their future family plans. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The project was financed by the Independent Research Fund Denmark. The authors have no conflict of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.
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.