Information and misinformation on assisted human reproduction techniques in Europe: a normative analysis of the information provided on the websites of medically assisted reproduction clinics

Albert M; Tapia R; Farfán J; Vicente A; Muñoz S; Toribio-López M; Carrasco JM; De Bayas Sanchez A; Fuller M; Barrett N; Güell F

doi:10.1186/s12910-026-01388-5

Ethics and Policy · Policy and Regulation

Information and misinformation on assisted human reproduction techniques in Europe: a normative analysis of the information provided on the websites of medically assisted reproduction clinics

Albert M, Tapia R, Farfán J, Vicente A, Muñoz S, Toribio-López M, Carrasco JM, De Bayas Sanchez A, Fuller M, Barrett N, Güell F

BMC medical ethics, 2026

DOI 10.1186/s12910-026-01388-5 PMID 41629892 PMC PMC12954940

RRM Academy Synopsis

Many European fertility clinic websites omit key facts on outcomes

Many European fertility clinic websites left out key facts on success rates and risks, a legal and ethics review of clinics in eight countries found. Researchers checked nearly 2000 pages against advertising law. Many success figures did not say what counted as success. Risks to babies got almost no mention.

Key Findings

Many clinics blurred a positive pregnancy test, a clinical pregnancy and a live birth. Where they separated them, success was frequently given as pregnancy and rarely as live birth.
Two clinics reported different success rates for IVF with an embryo that had not been frozen: 65.1% in Spain and 28% in Slovenia.
A clinic in North Macedonia said IVF success rates beat natural pregnancy, yet listed a live birth rate of 26% against 30% for natural conception.
Only two clinics addressed risks to newborns directly, and none offered detailed data or long-term studies on the health of children.
Practically all clinics offered add-ons lacking scientific support, most often PGT-A. None explicitly acknowledged the lack of consensus on their effectiveness.

Interpretation

The authors ran a normative analysis. They compared website text with advertising and consumer law and with the information they define as essential. Websites came from eight countries, collected from June to August 2023, and the authors call the sample illustrative of broader patterns. They say it cannot be generalized to all European clinics. Clinics supplied no patient information sheets or consent forms when asked. The study reports what websites say and measures no patient outcomes. The recommendations, such as defining success as a healthy child, come from the authors.

RRM Context

Restorative reproductive medicine starts by asking why conception has not happened. IVF bypasses that question without resolving it. The paper calls clinic websites one of the main bases for deciding about fertility treatment and finds their outcome and risk figures incomplete. Any approach to infertility can meet standards of clear outcome definitions and open reporting.

Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.

Abstract

Background

As part of the European Be better informed about Fertility project (B2-InF), we carried out a normative analysis of the information provided online by assisted reproduction clinics to the European public. This analysis aimed to determine the degree to which this information complies with regulations of medically assisted reproduction (MAR) and commercial information, and the main ethical implications related to the duty of information.

Methods

Information was gathered from the websites of 33 clinics across 8 European countries (Albania, Belgium, Spain, Italy, Kosovo, Northern Macedonia, Slovenia, Switzerland). Nearly 2000 pages of information were reviewed and checked for compliance with relevant frameworks of national and international law.

Results

The assessment revealed significant inconsistencies in how clinics present information online, with particular concerns regarding transparency about success rates, associated risks, add-on techniques and the legal and ethical issues that may arise during the use of these techniques.

Conclusions

The results of our analysis indicate an urgent need for enhanced regulatory oversight and standardized information requirements for assisted reproduction clinics across Europe. These findings suggest the necessity for harmonized legal frameworks that mandate comprehensive disclosure standards and establish effective enforcement mechanisms to ensure transparent and accurate information provision to potential patients.

Topics

Ethics and Policy Policy and Regulation Professional Standards

Ethics and Policy › Policy and Regulation › Professional Standards

PMID 41629892 41629892 DOI 10.1186/s12910-026-01388-5 10.1186/s12910-026-01388-5 Albert et al. 2026, Albert 2026

Information and misinformation on assisted human reproduction techniques in Europe: a normative analysis of the information provided on the websites of medically assisted reproduction clinics

Many European fertility clinic websites omit key facts on outcomes

Key Findings

Interpretation

RRM Context

Abstract

Topics

By this author

Related research