Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41939098›Full record

ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2026

Beyond the score: the imperative of comprehensive counseling in polygenic embryo screening.

Muhammad Nouman Javed, Fiza Abdul Ghaffar, Hafsa Nawaz, Osama Shahzad, Alaa Zayed

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Muhammad Nouman JavedDepartment of Medicine, Punjab Medical College, Faisalabad Medical University, Faisalabad, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-6516-4052
Fiza Abdul GhaffarDepartment of Medicine, Allama Iqbal Medical College, Lahore, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0987-7312
Hafsa NawazDepartment of Medicine, D.G. Khan Medical College, Dera Ghazi Khan, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-1557-0745
Osama ShahzadDepartment of Medicine, Punjab Medical College, Faisalabad Medical University, Faisalabad, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-8989-5625
Alaa ZayedDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, An-Najah National University, Nablus, Palestine.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6610-6841

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Polygenic embryo screening (PES) represents an emerging advancement in assisted reproduction, enabling the estimation of polygenic risk for complex diseases and traits in embryos. While PES holds promise for reducing disease risk, it raises ethical, social, and psychological concerns, particularly regarding how prospective parents comprehend and navigate these complex choices. Current debates often emphasize the moral dimensions of PES, yet the equally crucial issue of counseling remains underexplored. Decision-making in PES is complicated by probabilistic risk scores, emotional distress, and insufficient guidance, potentially leading to misinterpretation and inequitable access to information. Establishing comprehensive, multidisciplinary counseling, integrating genetic, psychological, and ethical perspectives, is vital for informed consent and reproductive autonomy. Effective counseling must clarify uncertainties, manage expectations, and provide emotional support. Ultimately, structured, equitable, and empathetic counseling models are essential to translate the theoretical benefits of PES into ethically sound clinical practice.

Indexed as

assisted reproductiongenetic counselinginformed decision-makingpolygenic embryo screeningreproductive ethics

Identifiers

PMID41939098
PMCPMC13048654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.