Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2018
The effects of an educational program for non-physician health care providers regarding fertility preservation.
Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 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
- Attitudes of healthcare providers towards fertility preservation in Portugal: perceived support across indications and their ethical implications.BMC medical ethics · 2026Observational
- Fertility preservation counseling for women of reproductive age diagnosed with cancer: an integrative review.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2024Review
- Non-physician's challenges in sexual and reproductive health care provision for women of reproductive age with cancer: a scoping review of barriers and facilitators.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022Article
- Consult and procedure incidence outcomes following establishment of a fertility preservation program for children with cancer.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
- Fex-Talk: a Short Educational Intervention Intended to Enhance Nurses' Readiness to Discuss Fertility and Sexuality with 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Clinical Practice guidelines recommend that physicians, nurses, social workers, and other health care providers should be prepared to discuss the risk of infertility with patients. We conducted an educational program for non-physician health care providers regarding fertility preservation and evaluated the effects of the educational program.
methodsThe 4-h educational program consisted of lectures about infertility as a potential risk of cancer treatment, fertility preservation, and psychosocial support. Knowledge, confidence, institutional change, and self-practice were assessed pre-program, immediately post-program, and 6 months post-program.
resultsOf 124 participants who joined the program, 74 completed and returned the follow-up survey 6 months after the program. Sixty-one percent of the participants were nurses, 27% were social workers, and 4% were psychologists. The scores for confidence and knowledge increased between pre- and immediate post-program periods (p < 0.01), and between pre- and 6-month post-program periods (p < 0.01). The knowledge score was 52, 76, and 71% at the 3 points respectively. The participants became more likely to disseminate fertility preservation counseling at their institutions (p < 0.01) and use informational resources (p < 0.01). Overall, self-practice and institutional support did not change.
conclusionsThe study revealed that this educational program is applicable for non-physicians to learn about fertility preservation. The participants improved significantly in confidence and knowledge, but not in counseling skills.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29681013What 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.