ArticleMedical humanities2026
Reproductive technology's animal unconscious: multispecies motherhood and humanimal horror.
Article in Medical humanities, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Preclinical animal testing has played a critical role within medical history. Yet it remains an underdiscussed topic within the medical humanities. What might happen, then, if we analyse the animal studies of the lab via the method of cultural critique that is animal studies? This essay responds to this question by exploring the roles that animals play, and are made to play, within the technologies for, debates about and narratives of human reproduction. The essay is comparative. First, it focuses on how the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) represents their experiments with lambs as part of their development of an artificial placenta. Then, it juxtaposes these narratives with two recent horror films that dramatise and hyperbolise the very human-animal relations on which CHOP's research relies. Both Laura Moss's
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.