ArticlePloS one2025
Coping with rejection as a sperm donor: A qualitative study of the personal impact of rejection and new health information.
Article in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe demand for sperm donation is increasing, yet only a small percentage of applicants are accepted, and little attention has been given to those who are rejected. The application process may reveal new medical or genetic information with potential personal and emotional consequences. The aim of this study was to explore how men experience rejection as sperm donors, including how they cope with the rejection and integrate potential new information into their lives.
methodsWe conducted qualitative, in-depth interviews with 19 men rejected as sperm donors. Data was analyzed using thematic analysis.
resultsSome men received new medical information that raised significant concerns, particularly regarding their health, fertility, and family. However, for most it was not the reason for rejection that affected them most, but the rejection itself. They had begun to identify as donors, and being turned down felt like a blow to their sense of self. Over time, participants used different coping strategies: information seeking, actionable reasoning, positive reframing, normalizing, and postponing. Although the experience was personally and emotionally challenging for many, it ultimately did not have a lasting negative impact on their lives.
conclusionsSperm donation is not only a medical act but also tied to social identity, with rejection having personal and emotional consequences. For men whose rejection is based on new medical information that causes significant concerns, sperm banks should support rejected donors and help them exit the process positively. Further research is warranted to find out how this can be done.
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.