The representation of medical risks and incentives concerning egg donation: an analysis of the websites of fertility clinics of Belgium, Spain and the UK.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Human Fertility Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-26 DOI:10.1080/14647273.2024.2380667
L Jacxsens, C Coveney, L Culley, S Lafuente-Funes, G Pennings, N Hudson, V Provoost
{"title":"The representation of medical risks and incentives concerning egg donation: an analysis of the websites of fertility clinics of Belgium, Spain and the UK.","authors":"L Jacxsens, C Coveney, L Culley, S Lafuente-Funes, G Pennings, N Hudson, V Provoost","doi":"10.1080/14647273.2024.2380667","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Considering the growing demand for egg donation (ED) and the scarcity of women coming forward as donors to meet this demand, scholars have expressed concerns that clinics may (initially) misrepresent risks to recruit more donors. Additionally, (non-)monetary incentives might be used to try to influence potential donors, which may pressure these women or cause them to dismiss their concerns. Since the internet is often the first source of information and first impressions influence individuals' choices, we examined the websites of fertility clinics to explore how they present medical risks, incentives and emotional appeals. Content Analysis and Frame Analysis were used to analyze a sample of Belgian, Spanish and UK clinic websites. The data show that the websites mainly focus on extreme and dangerous risks and side effects (e.g. severe OHSS) even though it is highly relevant for donors to be informed about less severe but more frequently occurring risks and side effects (e.g. bloating), since those influence donors' daily functioning. The altruistic narrative of ED in Europe was dominant in the data, although some (hidden) financial incentives were found on Spanish and UK websites. Nonetheless, all information about financial incentives still were presented subtly or in combination with altruistic incentives.</p>","PeriodicalId":13006,"journal":{"name":"Human Fertility","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Fertility","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2024.2380667","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Considering the growing demand for egg donation (ED) and the scarcity of women coming forward as donors to meet this demand, scholars have expressed concerns that clinics may (initially) misrepresent risks to recruit more donors. Additionally, (non-)monetary incentives might be used to try to influence potential donors, which may pressure these women or cause them to dismiss their concerns. Since the internet is often the first source of information and first impressions influence individuals' choices, we examined the websites of fertility clinics to explore how they present medical risks, incentives and emotional appeals. Content Analysis and Frame Analysis were used to analyze a sample of Belgian, Spanish and UK clinic websites. The data show that the websites mainly focus on extreme and dangerous risks and side effects (e.g. severe OHSS) even though it is highly relevant for donors to be informed about less severe but more frequently occurring risks and side effects (e.g. bloating), since those influence donors' daily functioning. The altruistic narrative of ED in Europe was dominant in the data, although some (hidden) financial incentives were found on Spanish and UK websites. Nonetheless, all information about financial incentives still were presented subtly or in combination with altruistic incentives.

有关卵子捐赠的医疗风险和激励措施的表述:对比利时、西班牙和英国生育诊所网站的分析。
考虑到对卵子捐赠(ED)的需求日益增长,而为满足这一需求而前来捐赠的女性却很少,学者们担心诊所可能(一开始)为了招募更多的捐赠者而虚报风险。此外,(非)金钱奖励可能会被用来试图影响潜在的捐献者,这可能会给这些妇女带来压力或使她们放弃自己的顾虑。由于互联网通常是信息的第一来源,而第一印象会影响个人的选择,因此我们研究了不孕不育诊所的网站,以探讨它们是如何介绍医疗风险、激励措施和情感诉求的。我们采用内容分析法和框架分析法对比利时、西班牙和英国的诊所网站进行了抽样分析。数据显示,这些网站主要关注极端和危险的风险和副作用(如严重的OHSS),尽管对于捐献者来说,了解不太严重但更常见的风险和副作用(如腹胀)是非常重要的,因为这些风险和副作用会影响捐献者的日常功能。尽管在西班牙和英国的网站上发现了一些(隐性的)经济激励措施,但欧洲 ED 的利他主义叙事在数据中占主导地位。尽管如此,所有关于经济激励的信息仍然是巧妙地或与利他激励结合在一起介绍的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Human Fertility
Human Fertility OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: Human Fertility is a leading international, multidisciplinary journal dedicated to furthering research and promoting good practice in the areas of human fertility and infertility. Topics included span the range from molecular medicine to healthcare delivery, and contributions are welcomed from professionals and academics from the spectrum of disciplines concerned with human fertility. It is published on behalf of the British Fertility Society. The journal also provides a forum for the publication of peer-reviewed articles arising out of the activities of the Association of Biomedical Andrologists, the Association of Clinical Embryologists, the Association of Irish Clinical Embryologists, the British Andrology Society, the British Infertility Counselling Association, the Irish Fertility Society and the Royal College of Nursing Fertility Nurses Group. All submissions are welcome. Articles considered include original papers, reviews, policy statements, commentaries, debates, correspondence, and reports of sessions at meetings. The journal also publishes refereed abstracts from the meetings of the constituent organizations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信