Skip Navigation


Human Reproduction Update Advance Access originally published online on May 14, 2009
Human Reproduction Update 2009 15(5):499-515; doi:10.1093/humupd/dmp018
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
15/5/499    most recent
dmp018v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Purewal, S.
Right arrow Articles by van den Akker, O.B.A.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Purewal, S.
Right arrow Articles by van den Akker, O.B.A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Systematic review of oocyte donation: investigating attitudes, motivations and experiences

S. Purewal1,3 and O.B.A. van den Akker1,2

1 Department of Psychology, Middlesex University, The Burroughs, Hendon, London NW4 4BT, UK 2 Centre for Human Reproductive Sciences, Birmingham Women's Health Care Trust, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TG, UK

3 Correspondence address. Tel: +44-20-8411-6861; E-mail: S.Purewal{at}mdx.ac.uk

BACKGROUND: The social and psychological factors determining intentions to donate gametes are important for clinics, policy-makers and recruitment campaigns. The aims of this systematic review were therefore to integrate the research findings regarding the psychosocial determinants of oocyte donation and extrapolate women's experiences of donation.

METHODS: A bibliographic search of English language publications of four computerized databases was undertaken with no time restriction set for publications.

RESULTS: A total of 64 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The research syntheses revealed there were distinct differences between patient and non-patient (known, commercial, volunteer and potential) donors on demographic characteristics, motives for donation, and issues relating to disclosure and attitudes towards the resultant offspring. Further, studies have found that a significant proportion of oocyte donors and women from the general population were prepared to donate their oocytes as identifiable donors. Studies which have examined the experiences of donors report positive experiences of oocyte donation. However, a number of methodological limitations relating to the oocyte donation research literature have been identified in this systematic review.

CONCLUSION: Differences between donor groups on a range of factors highlight the need for tailored psychosocial evaluation and counselling. The review has demonstrated that it is not useful to generalize across donor groups on various factors relating to oocyte donation.

Key words: oocyte donation / gamete donation / infertility / artificial reproductive technologies / systematic review

Received on February 16, 2009; revised April 2, 2009; accepted on April 7, 2009


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
S. Purewal and O.B.A van den Akker
A study of the effect of message framing on oocyte donation
Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2009; 24(12): 3136 - 3143.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.