« Previous
Next »
Fertility and Sterility
Volume 93, Issue 2
, Pages 499-509
, 15 January 2010
Fertility patients' views about frozen embryo disposition: results of a multi-institutional U.S. survey
References
- . The social implications of embryo cryopreservation. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:823–832
- United States Department of Health and Human Services/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2004 Assisted Reproductive Technology Success Rates: National Summary and Fertility Clinic Reports. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ART/ART2004.
- Cryopreserved embryos in the United States and their availability for research. Fertil Steril. 2003;79:1063–1069
- . A middle ground for stem cells. New York Times. January 19, 2007;A23
- . Audio interview: expanding federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:e18
- . Parent identity and ‘virtual’ children: why patients discard rather than donate unused embryos. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:1661–1669
- . Factors that affect infertility patients' decisions about disposition of frozen embryos. Fertil Steril. 2006;85:1623–1630
- . Mothers conceiving through in vitro fertilization: siblings, setbacks, and embryo dilemmas. Reprod Technol. 2000;10:131–135
- . Frozen embryos: too cold to touch? The dilemma ten years on. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:3081–3082
- . Efficacy of postal communication with patients who have cryopreserved pre-embryos. Fertil Steril. 1998;70:949–951
- . Decisions for the fate of frozen embryos: fresh insights into patients' thinking and their rationales for donating or discarding embryos. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:1751–1758
- . Needs assessment for those donating to stem cell research. Fertil Steril. 2007;88:560–564
- . Establishment of a successful donor embryo program: medical, ethical, and policy issues. Fertil Steril. 1999;71:604–608
- . Embryo donation at an Australian university in-vitro fertilisation clinic: issues and outcomes. Med J Aust. 2003;178:127–129
- . The disposition of unused frozen embryos. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:69–70
- . Embryo donation for medical research: attitudes and concerns of potential donors. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:871–877
- McMahon CA, Saunders DM. Attitudes of couples with stored frozen embryos toward conditional embryo donation. Fertil Steril. Published online November 28, 2007.
- . Deciding the fate of supernumerary frozen embryos: a survey of couples' decisions and the factors influencing their choice. Fertil Steril. 2006;86:86–91
- Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review. BMJ. 2002;324:1183
- . Willingness to donate frozen embryos for stem cell research. Science. 2007;317:46–47
- . Cognitive interviewing: a tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2005;
- . Embryo disposal practices in IVF clinics in the United States. Politics Life Sci. 2003;22:4–8
- . Values in conflict: public attitudes on stem cell research. Washington, DC: Genetics and Public Policy Center; 2005;
- . Cryopreserved human embryos in Canada and their availability for research. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2003;25:1026–1031
- Spontaneous pregnancies in couples who discontinued intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment: a 5-year follow-up study. Fertil Steril. 2002;78:550–556
- . Motivation to donate or not donate surplus embryos for stem-cell research: literature review. Fertil Steril. 2008;89:263–277
- Elements to be considered in obtaining informed consent for ART. Fertil Steril. 2006;86:S272–S273
- . Research implications of embryo cryopreservation choices made by patients undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2004;81:1154–1155
- . Patient attitudes to donation of embryos for research in Western Australia. Med J Aust. 2004;180:559–561
- . How do you ‘adopt’ a frozen egg?. Boston Globe. December 5, 2005;
- . Guidelines for human embryonic stem cell research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2005;revised 2007
- ETHICS: The ISSCR guidelines for human embryonic stem cell research. Science. 2007;315:603–604
A.D.L. has nothing to disclose. K.S. has nothing to disclose. C.V. has nothing to disclose. E.N. has nothing to disclose. C.A. has nothing to disclose. B.B. serves on the speakers' bureau for EMD Serono. R.C-D. has nothing to disclose. W.C.D. has nothing to disclose. E.G. has nothing to disclose. E.S.J. has nothing to disclose. P.G.M. has received grant support from Ferring and EMD Serono. E.R.M. is a consultant for Merck and GSK. B.O. has nothing to disclose. W.S. has performed sponsored research for Organon. J.S. is a consultant for Pfizer. J.A.T. has nothing to disclose. D.W. has nothing to disclose. R.R.F. has nothing to disclose. E.W. has nothing to disclose.
Supported by the Greenwall Foundation Presidential Award and Faculty Scholars Program; Duke Institute for Genome Sciences and Policy's Center for Genome Ethics, Law and Policy Research Fellowship Award; National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, the National Institutes of Health (1 K01 HL79517-01) [A.D.L.]; MREP Career Development Award from VA Health Services Research and Development (MRP 02-263 [K.S.], MRP04-216-1 [C.V.]); and NHGRI and U.S. Department of Energy (P50 HG003391) [R.C-D.].
PII: S0015-0282(08)04204-0
doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.10.015
© 2010 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. All rights reserved.
« Previous
Next »
Fertility and Sterility
Volume 93, Issue 2
, Pages 499-509
, 15 January 2010

