ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2025
How do women with Rokitansky syndrome and healthcare professionals reflect on the provision of uterine transplantation? Insights from an interview study in France, Norway, and Sweden.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A decade of human uterus transplantation.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- How do women with Rokitansky syndrome and healthcare professionals reflect on the provision of uterine transplantation? Insights from an interview study in France, Norway, and Sweden.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUterine transplantation is currently intended for women with absolute uterine infertility. Since proof of the concept in 2014, many countries have started research programs and clinical activities. However, access to uterine transplantation remains limited given that only a few hundred transplants have been described worldwide compared with the 1.5 million women of childbearing age who suffer from absolute uterine infertility. The aim of this study was to investigate how limited access to uterine transplantation is perceived by women with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome and health professionals involved in uterus transplantation programs. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe conducted a qualitative study with semistructured interviews in France, Norway, and Sweden with women with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome and health professional involved in uterine transplantation programs. The interviews were analyzed manually using thematic content analysis. The research questions were: How do (a) women with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome and (b) healthcare professionals involved in uterus transplantation programs perceive uterus transplantation and its accessibility 10 years after proof of concept?
resultsThe interviews enabled us to highlight a number of themes addressed by doctors and women with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome, the main ones being the hope raised by this technique and the disappointment for those who do not have access to it, the lack of perception of the risks associated with the technique, and finally, an inequity of access and the training difficulties this entails for the teams.
conclusionsAccess to uterine transplantation varies widely across Europe owing to legislative restrictions and limited access due to resources or competence. The result is a feeling of injustice/misunderstanding and despair for these women who had planned to become parents and cannot benefit from a transplant. They appear to be poorly supported. Women who are ultimately unable to access a transplant program should perhaps be given psychological support to deal with this disappointment, whereas the minority who finally have had access to transplant programs are supervised by well-trained multidisciplinary teams.
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.