ArticleSalud colectiva2026
[Illegal yet ongoing: surrogacy through the moral prism of urban Chinese women in Nanjing].
Article in Salud colectiva, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
How urban Chinese women understand and morally evaluate surrogacy remains an insufficiently explored area, despite the persistence of this practice in clandestine forms under a strict legal ban in China. From the perspective of moral sociology, this qualitative study foregrounds these overlooked voices through semi-structured interviews with 24 women in Nanjing, conducted between May and July 2025. The findings reveal a form of "pragmatic ambivalence": rather than holding binary positions of approval or rejection, participants articulate a nuanced and context-dependent stance. This stance is shaped by three key dimensions: (1) embodied reproductive experiences that heighten ethical sensitivity; (2) fertility pressures and practical reproductive needs that drive conditional support; and (3) legal prohibition and dominant moral norms that reinforce structural skepticism. We argue that women's attitudes do not constitute abstract choices, but are situated within the tension between bodily autonomy and familial obligation.
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.