ArticleReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2026
An analysis of the outcome of 2,443 women applying to be donors at a commercial egg bank in the USA.
Article in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDonated eggs are essential for a range of Medically Assisted Reproduction (MAR) procedures, but relatively little has been written about how donors are recruited. This study examined egg donor recruitment processes at a commercial egg-bank in Florida (USA). It documents what proportion of applicants were ultimately accepted and, if rejected, at what step, whether this was by choice or selection, whether their initial ID-release choice was important, and how this compares to the recruitment of sperm donors.
methodsAnonymised records of all egg donor applicants in 2018 and 2019 (n = 2,443) were examined to determine the number passing through (or lost) at each stage of the recruitment process and ultimately how many had successful egg retrieval and cryopreservation. Statistical analysis was carried out to examine differences between the initial ID-release choice made by egg donor applicants (ID-release vs. non-ID release).
resultsFew applicants (2.5%) were accepted and had eggs frozen for donation. This did not differ between applicants who opted at the outset to be ID-release (2.94%) compared to those who didn't (2.12%) (X
conclusionThis study demonstrates how challenging egg donor recruitment processes are, with only a small fraction of those who initially apply ultimately being accepted and having samples certified as safe for use in treatment. The initial ID-release choice of egg donor applicants in the USA has no bearing on whether they were finally accepted as donors or not and is unrelated to their reason for rejection from the program.
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.