ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2021
Is fertility preservation a part of comprehensive cancer care in the USA? A study of NCI-designated cancer center websites.
Article in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fertility in breast cancer survivorship: a scoping review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Review
- Review
- Fertility preservation and mental health among cancer patients of reproductive age.Fertility and sterility · 2025Review
- Article
- Are guidelines guiding? A mixed methods study examining the integration of ASCO fertility discussion guidelines in practice among oncologists and adolescents and young adults at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025Article
- Websites about, not for, adolescents? A systematic analysis of online fertility preservation information for adolescent and young adult cancer patients.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2024Article
- Ethical, legal, social, and policy issues of ovarian tissue cryopreservation in prepubertal girls: a critical interpretive review.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Review
- Disparities in Female Oncofertility Care in the United States: More Questions Than Answers.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Websites about, not for, adolescents? A systematic analysis of online fertility preservation information for adolescent and young adult cancer patients.Research square · 2023Article
- An assessment of oncofertility content on reproductive endocrinology and infertility clinic websites.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe delivery of oncofertility care remains challenging, and cancer patients increasingly utilize online health information to fill knowledge gaps in their fertility care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the website content of NCI-designated cancer centers to assess the quantity and quality of patient-oriented information pertaining to fertility preservation (FP).
methodsWe systematically abstracted, evaluated, and compared website content for NCI-designated cancer centers (CC) and comprehensive cancer centers (CCC) pertaining to oncofertility and fertility preservation for both male and female cancer patients. Readability of each website was evaluated using the Flesch-Kincaid grade level and Flesch reading ease score.
resultsOverall, 72% of websites mentioned the effect of cancer or cancer therapy on fertility potential. Only 56% of websites had a page devoted solely to the effect of cancer on fertility. Information for female patients was more common than for male patients (59% vs. 50%). CCC websites were more likely to include information about the effects of cancer treatment on fertility, the option for FP and details for FP methods. The majority of websites did not address risks and benefits of FP, moral and ethical considerations, or details about the success rates or costs. The median readability score correlated with a 12th grade reading level.
conclusionPatient-directed information pertaining to oncofertility and FP is inadequate on the majority of websites, and represents a gap in comprehensive cancer care and survivorship planning. Patients who rely primarily on internet-based information regarding oncofertility may not be well-informed about FP options in the critical period between cancer diagnosis and treatment. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Cancer patients and survivors interested in future fertility should be referred to reproductive specialists, when possible, for a comprehensive discussion about fertility preservation prior to cancer therapy and fertility options after completing cancer therapy.
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.