ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2017
Physicians' practice of discussing fertility preservation with cancer patients and the associated attitudes and barriers.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- ESHRE good practice recommendations on fertility preservation involving testicular tissue cryopreservation in children receiving gonadotoxic therapies†.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2025Guideline
- The Educational Program for Healthcare Providers Regarding Fertility Preservation for Cancer Patients: a Systematic Review.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021Pooled it
- The effects of an educational program for non-physician health care providers regarding fertility preservation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018Trial
- Fertility preservation in young breast cancer patients: A nationwide survey on knowledge, attitudes, and practices among breast surgical healthcare providers in China.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2025Article
- Treatment Access and Caregiver Experience in Pediatric Rhabdomyosarcoma: Results of an Online Survey.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Reproduction in life and death: should cancer patients with a poor prognosis be offered fertility preservation interventions?Reproduction & fertility · 2023Article
- Oncofertility Knowledge Among Internal Medicine Residents in an Academic Center in Mexico.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2022Article
- Otorhinolaryngologists/head and neck surgeons' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding fertility preservation in young cancer patients treated with chemotherapy: an anonymous questionnaire survey.International journal of clinical oncology · 2021Article
- The Knowledge, Attitude, and Self-Reported Behaviors of Oncology Physicians Regarding Fertility Preservation in Adult Cancer Patients.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2020Article
- Correlates of regret with treatment decision-making among Japanese women with breast cancer: results of an internet-based cross-sectional survey.BMC women's health · 2019Article
- How can we improve oncofertility care for patients? A systematic scoping review of current international practice and models of care.Human reproduction update · 2019Article
- Childbirth and fertility preservation in childhood and adolescent cancer patients: a second national survey of Japanese pediatric endocrinologists.Clinical pediatric endocrinology : case reports and clinical investigations : official journal of the Japanese Society for Pediatric Endocrinology · 2017Article
- Current Awareness and Attitude toward Fertility Preservation in Indonesia: A Nationwide Survey Among Health-care Providers.Journal of human reproductive sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study is to describe physicians' clinical practice of discussing fertility issues with cancer patients and determine the factors associated with such discussion.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, a nationwide Internet survey was conducted among physicians who provided daily medical care to cancer patients at hospitals or clinics. Participants answered a questionnaire assessing characteristics, discussion practices, attitudes, and barriers regarding fertility preservation.
resultsAmong the 180 participants, 42% discussed fertility issues with patients daily, and 30% had experience in referring patients to fertility preservation specialists. A multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that those who agreed or strongly agreed with the statements "physicians are responsible for discussing fertility preservation" (OR = 2.04, 95% CI 1.14-3.63, p < 0.05) and "patients who have an exceedingly aggressive disease and need immediate cancer treatment should not be told about fertility issues" (OR =1.84, 95% CI 1.09-3.10, p < 0.05) were nearly twice as likely to discuss fertility issues with patients.
conclusionsCompared to Western countries, fertility issues are less likely to be discussed in Japan. To increase opportunities for patients to discuss fertility issues, the ASCO guidelines should be widely understood. Additionally, these results suggest that physicians who are more likely to discuss fertility issues might feel more conflicted about whether they in fact should discuss such issues with patients with poor prognosis or insufficient time for cancer treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27889828What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.