Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30788661›Full record

ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2019

Oncofertility: insights from IVF specialists-a worldwide web-based survey analysis.

Gon Shoham, Rachel Levy-Toledano, Milton Leong, Ariel Weissman, Yuval Yaron, Zeev Shoham

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Gon ShohamSackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, P.O.B. 39040, Ramat Aviv, 69978, Tel Aviv, Israel. gonshoha@mail.tau.ac.il.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9225-3256
Rachel Levy-ToledanoTeva Europe, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Milton LeongIVF Clinic, The Women's Clinic, 12/F, Central Tower, 28 Queen's Road Central, Central, Hong Kong.
Ariel WeissmanSackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, P.O.B. 39040, Ramat Aviv, 69978, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Yuval YaronSackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, P.O.B. 39040, Ramat Aviv, 69978, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Zeev ShohamThe Reproductive Medicine and IVF Unit, Kaplan Medical Center, 76100, Rehovot, Israel.
Tel Aviv University · ILHadassah Medical Center · ILLondon Women's Clinic · GBTeva Pharmaceuticals (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis research sought to understand IVF-physicians' knowledge of, experience with, and attitudes toward fertility preservation for cancer patients.

methodsA 35-question, self-report survey request was emailed to IVF providers who were registered on the IVF-Worldwide.com network (3826 clinics). Physicians submitted responses on the IVF-Worldwide.com website. Survey results were reported as a proportion of the responding clinics.

resultsSurvey responses were completed by 321 (8.4%) globally distributed IVF clinics, representing 299,800 IVF cycles. Of these clinics, 86.6% (278) performed fertility preservation, treating approximately 6300 patients annually. However, 18.4% of the centers reported that patients sought advice independently, without an oncologist's referral. Ovarian tissue cryopreservation was performed by 37.7% of the clinics, yet 52.6% considered the procedure experimental. IVM was performed by 16.5% of responding clinics. A majority (63.6%) of the clinics selected treatment protocols based on each patient's malignancy. Most respondents (76.3%) disagreed that fertility preservation was not yet successful enough to make it an available option. However, 44.2% believed that pregnancy rates following oocyte cryopreservation could not be determined because not enough oocyte cryopreservation patients had completed embryo transfer.

conclusionsMost clinics performed fertility preservation, tailoring protocols to each patient's disease and condition. Almost 20% of patients sought advice independently, indicating that more effort is needed to encourage oncologists to refer patients. Most survey respondents believed that data was not yet available on either live birth outcomes or the best protocol for each disease. Therefore, long-term study must continue, with the establishment of interim milestones and an outcome-tracking registry.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelFemaleFertility PreservationFertilization in VitroHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInfertility, FemaleInternetNeoplasmsPractice Patterns, Physicians'PregnancyPregnancy RateSpecializationSurveys and QuestionnairesCryopreservationFertility preservationIVFIVF-WorldwideOncofertilitySurvey

Identifiers

PMID30788661
PMCPMC6541670
OpenAlexW2915882653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.