ArticleBMJ open2026
Access to fertility care for LGBTIQ+ and unpartnered persons: a systematic review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInfertility is a major public health concern, and many individuals face substantial barriers to accessing fertility care. Across jurisdictions, regulations, eligibility criteria and funding frameworks for fertility care vary considerably, particularly in relation to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer/questioning people (LGBTIQ+), as well as unpartnered individuals. Moreover, existing definitions and prevalence estimates of infertility are largely derived from studies of heterosexual couples which may underestimate the need for fertility care among other populations. This protocol describes a systematic review designed to synthesise current evidence on the need for and access to fertility care among LGBTIQ+ populations and unpartnered individuals as well as the policies and regulations that govern such care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. Systematic searches were conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Global Health, as well as grey literature sources including ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, ECRI Guidelines Trust, Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) Guidelines, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, fertility societies guidelines and Google Scholar. Eligible studies will include quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods, narrative synthesis and typology mapping designs. Two reviewers will independently perform title/abstract and full-text screening, data extraction and quality assessment. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist will be used for qualitative studies and the Joanna Briggs Institute tools for quantitative studies. Completeness and credibility assessments will be applied to narrative syntheses and typology mappings. The primary outcomes will include measures of fertility care need, indicators of access and policy frameworks influencing service availability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study does not involve human participants. The protocol received an exemption from Research Ethics Board review by the McGill University Health Centre Research Ethics Board. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and professional networks and shared with the WHO to inform evidence-based policy. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251126056.
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.