↓ Skip to main content

Ethics and regulation of inter-country medically assisted reproduction: a call for action

Overview of attention for article published in Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Ethics and regulation of inter-country medically assisted reproduction: a call for action
Published in
Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13584-016-0117-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carmel Shalev, Adi Moreno, Hedva Eyal, Michal Leibel, Rhona Schuz, Talia Eldar-Geva

Abstract

The proliferation of medically assisted reproduction (MAR) for the treatment of infertility has brought benefit to many individuals around the world. But infertility and its treatment continue to be a cause of suffering, and over the past decade, there has been a steady growth in a new global market of inter-country medically assisted reproduction (IMAR) involving 'third-party' individuals acting as surrogate mothers and gamete donors in reproductive collaborations for the benefit of other individuals and couples who wish to have children. At the same time there is evidence of a double standard of care for third-party women involved in IMAR, violations of human rights of children and women, and extreme abuses that are tantamount to reproductive trafficking. This paper is the report of an inter-disciplinary working group of experts who convened in Israel to discuss the complex issues of IMAR. In Israel too IMAR practices have grown rapidly in recent years, mainly because of restrictions on access to domestic surrogacy for same sex couples and a chronically insufficient supply of egg cells for the treatment of couples and singles in need. Drawing upon local expertise, the paper describes documented practices that are harmful, suggests principles of good practice based on an ethic of care, and calls for action at the international, national and professional levels to establish a human rights based system of international governance for IMAR based on three regulatory models: public health monitoring, inter-country adoption, and trafficking in human beings, organs and tissues.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 118 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 18%
Student > Bachelor 20 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 36 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 14%
Social Sciences 16 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 6%
Psychology 6 5%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 41 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,880,767
of 22,914,829 outputs
Outputs from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#283
of 578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,608
of 419,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#12
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,914,829 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 419,650 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.