Survey of U.S. reproductive medicine clinicians’ attitudes on polygenic embryo screening

Polygenic embryo screening (PES) is used to screen embryos for their genetic likelihood of developing complex conditions and traits. We surveyed 152 U.S. reproductive endocrinology and infertility specialists (REIs) on their views of PES. While most respondents (97%) were at least slightly familiar with PES, general approval of PES was low (12%), with the majority expressing disapproval (46%) or uncertainty (42%). A majority (58%) believed risks outweigh benefits, while only 16% felt benefits outweigh risks. Most clinicians (85-77%) were very or extremely concerned about low accuracy, confusion over results, false expectations, and eugenics. Nonetheless, when asked to vote on whether PES should be allowed, 44% would vote to allow it, 45% would vote to disallow it, and 10% would abstain from voting. REIs showed more support for PES when used to screen for physical and psychiatric health conditions (59-55% approving) rather than behavioral or physical traits (7-6% approving).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
npj Genomic Medicine
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41525-025-00530-3
Primary Topic
Reproductive Health and Technologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Survey of U.S. reproductive medicine clinicians’ attitudes on polygenic embryo screening

Aayushi Gandhi, Todd Lencz, Gabriel Lázaro‐Muñoz, Rémy A. Furrer et al.
npj Genomic Medicine
Reproductive Health and Technologies
article

Survey of U.S. reproductive medicine clinicians’ attitudes on polygenic embryo screening

Aayushi Gandhi, Todd Lencz, Gabriel Lázaro‐Muñoz, Rémy A. Furrer, Stacey Pereira, Shai Carmi, Dorit Barlevy
article en

Abstract

Polygenic embryo screening (PES) is used to screen embryos for their genetic likelihood of developing complex conditions and traits. We surveyed 152 U.S. reproductive endocrinology and infertility specialists (REIs) on their views of PES. While most respondents (97%) were at least slightly familiar with PES, general approval of PES was low (12%), with the majority expressing disapproval (46%) or uncertainty (42%). A majority (58%) believed risks outweigh benefits, while only 16% felt benefits outweigh risks. Most clinicians (85-77%) were very or extremely concerned about low accuracy, confusion over results, false expectations, and eugenics. Nonetheless, when asked to vote on whether PES should be allowed, 44% would vote to allow it, 45% would vote to disallow it, and 10% would abstain from voting. REIs showed more support for PES when used to screen for physical and psychiatric health conditions (59-55% approving) rather than behavioral or physical traits (7-6% approving).

npj Genomic MedicineVol. 10(1)
Feinstein Institute for Medical Research (US), Harvard University (US), Hofstra University (US), Baylor College of Medicine (US), Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL), Massachusetts General Hospital (US), Zucker Hillside Hospital (US), Stanford University (US)
National Institutes of Health
Openalex Percentile: Top 52%
Reproductive Health and Technologies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Survey of U.S. reproductive medicine clinicians’ attitudes on polygenic embryo screening — Aayushi Gandhi, Todd Lencz, et al. · npj Genomic Medicine (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS