Objectives The aim of this study was to map and compare stakeholders’ perceptions of barriers towards cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women in seven European countries. Design In Collaborative User Boards, stakeholders were invited to participate to identify barriers towards participation in cervical cancer screening. Setting The study is nested in the European Union-funded project CBIG-SCREEN which aims to tackle inequity in cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women (www.cbig-screen.eu). Data collection took place in Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy, Portugal and Romania. Participants Participants represented micro-level stakeholders covering representatives of users, that is, vulnerable women, meso-level stakeholders covering healthcare professionals and social workers, and macro-level stakeholders covering programme managers and decision-makers. Methods Across the seven countries, 25 meetings in Collaborative User Boards with a duration of 2 hours took place between October 2021 and June 2022. The meetings were video recorded or audio recorded, transcribed and translated into English for a qualitative framework analysis. Results 120 participants took part in the Collaborative User Boards. Context-specific barriers were related to different healthcare systems and characteristics of vulnerable populations. In Romania and Bulgaria, the lack of a continuous screening effort and lack of ways to identify eligible women were identified as barriers for all women rather than being specific for women in vulnerable situations. The participants in Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy and Portugal identified providers’ lack of cultural and social sensitivity towards vulnerable women as barriers. In all countries, vulnerable women’s fear, shame and lack of priority to preventive healthcare were identified as psychological barriers. Conclusion The study provides an overview of stakeholders’ perceived barriers towards vulnerable women’s cervical cancer screening participation in seven European countries. The organisation of healthcare systems and the maturity of screening programmes differ between countries, while vulnerable women’s psychological barriers had several similarities.

Background: Reasonable disagreement about the role awarded to gamete donors in decision-making on the use of embryos created by gamete donation (EGDs) for research purposes emphasises the importance of considering the implementation of participatory, adaptive, and trustworthy policies and guidelines for consent procedures. However, the perspectives of gamete donors and recipients about decision-making regarding research with EGDs are still under-researched, which precludes the development of policies and guidelines informed by evidence. This study seeks to explore the views of donors and recipients about who should take part in consent processes for the use of EGDs in research. Methods: From July 2017 to June 2018, 72 gamete donors and 175 recipients completed a self-report structured questionnaire at the Portuguese Public Bank of Gametes (response rate: 76%). Agreement with dual consent was defined as the belief that the use of EGDs in research should be consented by both donors and recipients. Results: The majority of participants (74.6% of donors and 65.7% of recipients) were willing to donate embryos for research. Almost half of the donors (48.6%) and half of the recipients (46.9%) considered that a dual consent procedure is desirable. This view was more frequent among employed recipients (49.7%) than among non-employed (21.4%). Donors were less likely to believe that only recipients should be involved in giving consent for the use of EGDs in research (25.0% vs. 41.7% among recipients) and were more frequently favourable to the idea of exclusive donors’ consent (26.4% vs. 11.4% among recipients). Conclusions: Divergent views on dual consent among donors and recipients indicate the need to develop evidence-based and ethically sustainable policies and guidelines to protect well-being, autonomy and reproductive rights of both stakeholder groups. More empirical research and further theoretical normative analyses are needed to inform people-centred policy and guidelines for shared decision-making concerning the use of EGDs for research.

(2019). Concerns with educating the public about donating and receiving gametes. The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care. Ahead of Print.

Conhecer a discussão em torno dos desafios sociais e éticos da doação de gametas é fundamental para a boa governança das técnicas de reprodução assistida. Neste artigo, analisam-se os tópicos que orientaram o debate nas organizações de ética portuguesas, discutindo as suas conexões com os temas abordados internacionalmente. Para tal, em março de 2018, pesquisamos sistematicamente os websites do Conselho Nacional de Procriação Medicamente Assistida e do Conselho Nacional de Ética para as Ciências da Vida. Procedemos à análise de conteúdo temática de 25 documentos. Os resultados indicam que o debate se centrou na acessibilidade, no anonimato e na compensação de doadores e, em menor extensão, nas responsabilidades profissionais. Observaram-se posicionamentos heterogêneos e tensões entre múltiplos direitos e princípios éticos associados a receptores, a pessoas nascidas com recurso à doação de gametas e a doadores. Esses têm em comum três alegações: a escassez de evidência científica; as experiências de outros países; e regulamentações oriundas de entidades internacionais. Na literatura abordam-se tópicos adicionais, nomeadamente: uma via dupla que conjugue anonimato/identificação de doadores; implementação de sistemas de registo reprodutivo para receptores e doadores; limites do rastreio genético a doadores; doação por familiares/conhecidos; e o papel dos doadores na decisão quanto ao destino de embriões criopreservados e na escolha das características dos receptores dos seus gametas. Há espaço para expandir o debate e promover a pesquisa em torno das implicações sociais e éticas da doação de gametas, considerando a participação de todos os cidadãos.