SynthesisPediatric research2025
Ethical challenges in conducting maternal-fetal surgery trials. A systematic review.
Synthesis in Pediatric research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- In Utero Molecular-Targeted Drug Therapies: Translational Principles, Pharmacologic Considerations, and Emerging Clinical Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Maternal outcomes following prenatal spina bifida repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Review
- Prenatal therapies: a Points to Consider framework for responsible innovation.BMC medical genomics · 2025Review
- A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis of Biomedical Research Waste: Current Situation, Development, and Trends.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- Advances in Fetal Surgery: A Narrative Review of Therapeutic Interventions and Future Directions.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Advances in the prevention and prenatal treatment of spina bifida.Discoveries (Craiova, Romania)Review
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
objectiveTo present the ethical challenges embedded in published maternal-fetal surgery (MFS) trials and their potential solutions.
methodSystematic review of normative and empirical literature. We selected articles based on predefined inclusion criteria. QUAGOL methodology was used for analysis.
resultsForty-three articles were included. We identified two main themes. First, clinical ethics issues. One of the main challenges is balancing rights of the fetus with the rights of the pregnant person. There seems to be an agreement that the pregnant person has the right to decide whether to participate regardless of fetal benefit. Second, research ethics issues. The main issues are difficulties in obtaining a sizeable sample, which lead to trials delays and cancellations, and in obtaining appropriate standardization. These difficulties have important ethical ramifications. For example, trial cancellations due the lack of proper sample size generate a waste of resources and pointlessly place participants at risk as conclusive evidence on MFS efficacy was not obtained.
conclusionsWe need to develop creative solutions that can prevent some of these ethical concerns. We need to involve all the relevant stakeholders in the development process. Further, researchers should discuss what practical issues they encountered and how they addressed them in their publications. IMPACT STATEMENT: Understanding the ethical challenges embedded in MFS trials will help improving future trials and, consequently, clinical outcomes. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review unveiling the ethical challenges in maternal-fetal surgery trials. To offer a complete overview of the challenges, we included both normative and empirical literature. We found that the main ethical challenges are practical difficulties that have important ethical ramification. E.g., difficulties in recruitment might hinder scientific validity, which in turn might lead to suboptimal treatment.
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.