ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2020
Equal opportunity for all? An analysis of race and ethnicity in fertility preservation in New York City.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Fertility preservation access among female adolescents and young adults with cancer: A systematic review.Cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Review
- Occurrence and predictors of patient reported fertility discussions in non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients: utilizing the lymphoma epidemiology of outcomes (LEO) cohort study.Leukemia & lymphoma · 2026Article
- Survivorship Considerations and Management in the Adolescent and Young Adult Sarcoma Population: A Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Review
- Standardized Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Consultation for Pediatric and Adolescent Oncology Patients.Journal of adolescent and young adult oncology · 2024Article
- Learnings from Racialized Adolescents and Young Adults with Lived Experiences of Cancer: "It's Okay to Critique the System That Claims to Save Us".Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Racial Disparities in Fertility Care: A Narrative Review of Challenges in the Utilization of Fertility Preservation and ART in Minority Populations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Clinicians' perspectives on barriers and facilitators to sperm banking in adolescent males with cancer: a mixed-methods study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- Disparities in fertility preservation among patients diagnosed with female breast cancer.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- Disparities in Female Oncofertility Care in the United States: More Questions Than Answers.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Oocyte Cryopreservation for Medical and Planned Indications: A Practical Guide and Overview.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation and the Black Obstetrician Gynecologist: Utilization and Perspectives.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2022Article
- Sociodemographic differences in utilization of fertility services among reproductive age women diagnosed with cancer in the USA.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022Article
- Health Disparities: Impact of Health Disparities and Treatment Decision-Making Biases on Cancer Adverse Effects Among Black Cancer Survivors.Clinical journal of oncology nursing · 2021Review
- Impact of a novel family-centered values clarification tool on adolescent sperm banking attempts at the time of a new cancer diagnosis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the racial and ethnic make-up of patients who accessed medically indicated fertility preservation services (MIFP) against the overall racial diversity (including Hispanic origin) across women of reproductive age diagnosed with cancer in New York City (NYC).
methodsAll patients who completed at least one MIFP between January 2017 and December 2018 were reviewed. Race was self-reported. A calculation of the expected racial distribution across women of reproductive age with cancer in NYC was determined using the most recent NYC census data. Statistical analysis included chi-square goodness of fit and test for independence and Kruskal-Wallis H test, with p < 0.05 considered significant.
resultsA total of 107 patients who accessed MIFP were included. A total of 55 (51.4%) identified as White, 3 (2.8%) as Black, 13 (12.2%) as Asian, 6 (5.6%) as Hispanic, 3 (2.8%) as other, and 27 (25.2%) did not report. A total of 78.5% of patients had insurance. There was no significant difference in racial distribution by cancer type (p = 0.255). A subgroup analysis excluding the BRCA+ patients and races not reported by the census (n = 69) was then performed, showing a statistically significant difference between observed (O) and expected (E) cases of fertility preservation (FP) by race at our center-White 47O/32E, Black 3O/15E, Asian 13O/7E, and Hispanic 6O/15E (p < 0.001). A statistically significant difference in racial distribution by FP type was observed.
conclusionsThere is a difference in the observed vs expected racial distribution of patients accessing MIFP. Further studies are needed to identify modifiable factors to better ensure equal opportunity to all patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.