SynthesisInternational journal of community based nursing and midwifery2025
Reproductive Donors' Needs and Preferences: A Mixed-methods Systematic Review.
Synthesis in International journal of community based nursing and midwifery, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Reproductive donation is a challenging task, in which donors' needs are sometimes neglected. To provide reproductive donors with well-structured, evidence-based, and donor-centered care, it is essential to acknowledge their unique needs and preferences. This study aimed to synthesize the current evidence regarding donors' needs and preferences. Methods: This mixed-methods systematic review (MMSR) was conducted based on the recommended approach for MMSR by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) manual for data synthesis. The databases of Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched by two researchers separately, using keywords such as "egg donor", "sperm donor", "ovum donor", "gamete donor", "embryo donor", desire, expectation, preference, and need without a time limit, up to December 2024. Original research articles regarding reproductive donors' needs, written in English, were included in the study. Reviews, commentaries, letters to the editor, book chapters, and theses were excluded. Quality assessment was carried out by two researchers using JBI tools for cross-sectional, cohort, and qualitative studies. Data were synthesized by the convergent integrated approach by three researchers. Results: Through data synthesis of 34 eligible articles, six categories of reproductive donors' needs and preferences emerged. These categories included 1) Need for support, 2) Informational needs, 3) Need for counseling, 4) Requirement for financial policies, 5) Preference towards recognition of donors' rights, and 6) Need for preserving donors' dignity and respect. Conclusion: Various reproductive donors' needs and preferences are not completely met by the current care provided by fertility clinics. Healthcare policymakers and fertility clinics must consider the donors' needs and preferences in policymaking and/or clinical practice to provide the services that donors deserve.
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.