ArticleBMC medical ethics2026
Deciding whether to donate fetal tissue for research.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHuman fetal tissue (HFT) has played a pivotal role in many areas of biomedical research. Since its inception, HFT research has been a topic of ethical debate and specific regulation due to its link to abortion. To date, the ethical debate surrounding HFT donation for research has proceeded with limited empirical data to guide policy decisions. Current regulations are designed to minimize the possibility that HFT donation could impact the decision of whether to have an abortion by requiring that clinical consent for abortion be obtained prior to discussing research opportunities. Despite these timing restrictions, questions continue to be raised about the validity of informed consent for HFT research. We sought to collect empirical data to inform the policy debates by directly querying the experience of pregnant women asked to donate HFT for research.
methodsWe conducted qualitative interviews with 51 women who chose (n = 40), or declined (n = 11), to donate HFT. Recruitment challenges and high attrition impacted the number of participants we were able to interview who had declined to donate.
resultsResults revealed that none of the interviewees felt pressured to donate, and no one objected to being asked to participate. The majority of those who chose to donate HFT felt invested in the research and motivated to learn results. Participant feedback about the consent process, however, converged on a desire to learn about the option of HFT donation earlier in the appointment to allow for more time to consider research participation. Limitations include that the study took place in a single US state and results may differ in other jurisdictions.
conclusionsWe conclude with recommendations for policy amendments that could improve the experience of potential participants asked to donate HFT for biomedical research.
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.