ArticleMonash bioethics review2026
Beyond montreal: a critical evaluation of the Montreal Criteria for uterine transplantation.
Article in Monash bioethics review, 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
Uterine transplantation (UTx) is an innovative and exciting development that is aimed at making available the experience of gestation to those for whom it may otherwise be out of reach. Given the personal and social importance of this experience to many people, this is a laudable goal. Outside of at least one historic outlier, this practice has primarily been discussed in the context of resolving uterine factor infertility (UFI) for cisgender women. The guidelines and protocols that have been established around UTx understand Uterine Factor Infertility (UFI) as the indication for UTx. This article critically evaluates the Montreal Criteria (2012, 2013) as the primary ethical guidelines regarding UTx. This evaluation focuses on and challenges the way the Criteria structure the discussion around UFI as indication for UTx and the requirement for female genetics. I argue that, outside of the initial experimental design of UTx, there are prima facie grounds for making UTx available outside of the indication of UFI, and that for reasons both internal and external to the Montreal Criteria's analysis of UTx, there are no overwriting ethical reasons to limit UTx to cis-gender women.
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.