Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39681416›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical ethics2025

Polygenic risk scores and embryonic screening: considerations for regulation.

Casey M Haining, Julian Savulescu, Louise Keogh, G Owen Schaefer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Neurodegenerative Diseases in Children: A Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  3. Solones, Solo Reproduction and Vice.Asian bioethics review · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors.

Casey M HainingCentre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9596-6654
Julian SavulescuCentre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore jsavules@nus.edu.sg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1691-6403
Louise KeoghCentre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2963-6451
G Owen SchaeferCentre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6915-6148

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) have recently been used to inform reproductive decision-making in the context of embryonic screening. While this is yet to be widespread, it is contested and raises several challenges. This article provides an overview of some of the ethical considerations that arise with using PRSs for embryo screening and offers a series of regulatory considerations for jurisdictions that may wish to permit this in the future. These regulatory considerations cover possible regulators and regulatory tools, eligibility criteria, information and education requirements and the need for ongoing refinement of the relevant technology, research and consultation.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingMultifactorial InheritancePreimplantation DiagnosisDecision MakingFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic Risk ScoreHumansPregnancyRisk AssessmentEthics- MedicalPolicyReproductive Medicine

Identifiers

PMID39681416
PMCPMC12505069

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.