O-097 The presentation of medical risks and incentives in egg donation: an analysis of Belgian, Spanish and UK fertility clinic websites
Authors: Jacxsens L , Coveney C , Culley L , Herbrand C , Lafuente-Funes S , Pavone V , Pennings G , Weis C , Hudson N , Provoost V 
Published: August 2021

Study question

How do fertility clinics’ websites of the UK, Belgium and Spain present the medical risks of egg donation and incentives?

Summary answer

Spanish and UK websites typically included more incentives to recruit egg donors compared to the Belgian websites. OHSS was overall the most discussed risk.

What is known already

People commonly turn to the internet for initial information. Primary presentations of information of a subject co-determine how an individual interprets the topic and thus influence later decisions. Considering the growing demand and clinics’ dependency on egg donors, some scholars have expressed concerns that clinics might (initially) misrepresent risks to recruit more egg donors. Offering appealing incentives may also encourage potential donors to dismiss possible risks and side-effects.

Therefore, it is important to see how incentives (both monetary and non-monetary rewards) and risks are presented on the websites of fertility clinics, the first source of information for egg donors.

Study design, size, duration

This study is part of the EDNA-project, a multi-phased comparative study (2017-2021), that aims to explore the social, political, economic and moral configuration of egg donation in the United Kingdom, Belgium and Spain. In this study, we only focused on the medical risks of egg donation and incentives presented on the fertility clinics’ websites of the three countries.

Participants/materials, setting, methods

We analysed the websites of all Belgian fertility clinics (n = 18), and a maximum variation sample in the UK (n = 21) and Spain (n = 23). The sampling was based on the geographical location of the clinic, size/number of cycles performed each year, the clinic’s status (independent or part of a larger clinical group) and whether the clinic was public or privately funded in the UK. Frame analysis and content analysis were used for analysis in Nvivo12.

Main results and the role of chance

No misrepresentation of risks was found. There was an extensive variety in the representation of risks. There were differences between the websites of the three countries (e.g. the risks of having acne was only discussed on Spanish websites), but also remarkable differences within the websites of a particular country (of the 40 risks, 13 were one-off mentions, each found on a single website). A description of a risk was generally accompanied by a minimization or normalization of the risk, or a statement about the fertility clinic’s excellent care for their egg donors. These three approaches were often combined.

Our analysis differentiated between incentives (i.e. external rewards) and emotional appeals. An appeal to emotions (e.g. empathy) can also motivate behavioural action (e.g. donation) but was not considered as an incentive since there is no external reward.

While Belgian websites used almost no incentives, Spanish and UK websites used gratitude and a rewarding experience as incentives. However, only Spanish websites used free medical tests as incentives, while UK websites were the only ones that used discounts received with egg sharing as an incentive. All countries’ websites used emotional appeals by enticing feelings of empathy for the recipients.

Limitations, reasons for caution

Not all UK and Spanish fertility clinics’ websites were analysed. However, our international team of researchers applied a maximum variation sampling strategy. This generated samples of clinics per country that were as diversified as possible.

Wider implications of the findings

The study shows that incentives are more often used on the UK and Spanish websites than on the Belgian websites. All three countries’ websites used emotional appeals. It should be studied how effective these incentives and emotional appeals are, and if there is a correlation with the potential donors’ risk-perceptions.

Trial registration number

not applicable