Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33629820›Full record

ArticlePediatric blood & cancer2021

Family communication about fertility preservation in adolescent males newly diagnosed with cancer.

Anna L Olsavsky, Charleen I Theroux, Taylor M Dattilo, James L Klosky, Sarah H O'Brien, Gwendolyn P Quinn, Cynthia A Gerhardt, Leena Nahata

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric blood & cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Anna L OlsavskyThe Abigail Wexner Research Institute, Center for Biobehavioral Health, Columbus, Ohio, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7037-2510
Charleen I TherouxThe Abigail Wexner Research Institute, Center for Biobehavioral Health, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Taylor M DattiloThe Abigail Wexner Research Institute, Center for Biobehavioral Health, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
James L KloskyDepartment of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine and Aflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Sarah H O'BrienThe Abigail Wexner Research Institute, Center for Biobehavioral Health, Columbus, Ohio, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8855-9746
Gwendolyn P QuinnDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Cynthia A GerhardtThe Abigail Wexner Research Institute, Center for Biobehavioral Health, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Leena NahataThe Abigail Wexner Research Institute, Center for Biobehavioral Health, Columbus, Ohio, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3899-2642
Neurobehavioral Systems · USNationwide Children's Hospital · USEmory University · USNew York University · US

Funding

Optimizing fertility preservation and decision quality in male AYA with cancer: A family-centered interventionK08CA237338 · NCI · RESEARCH INST NATIONWIDE CHILDREN'S HOSP · PI NAHATA, LEENA · 2019 to 2023
$1.0M
NCI NIH HHS K08 CA237338
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundApproximately half of male childhood cancer survivors experience fertility impairment, which can cause psychological distress. Sperm banking remains underutilized among adolescent males with cancer. Parent recommendation influences banking decisions, yet multi-informant studies have not been conducted to examine fertility preservation (FP) communication and decision making in this population. This study explored FP communication among mothers, fathers, and their male adolescents newly diagnosed with cancer. PROCEDURE: Thirty-three male adolescents, 32 mothers, and 22 fathers completed semi-structured interviews 1-2 months after cancer diagnosis addressing this question: Tell me more about conversations you had about fertility preservation/sperm banking with your health care providers, parents/son, other family members, or anyone else. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim for thematic content analysis.

resultsFive process themes emerged: (1) reliance on health care team and social support networks to facilitate FP decisions (only parents); (2) withholding parental opinion and deferring the decision to the adolescent; (3) ease of communication (primarily adolescents); (4) communication barriers/facilitators; (5) not being present or not remembering details of FP conversations with health care providers (primarily fathers and adolescents). Four content themes included: (1) preference for biological (grand)parenthood; (2) consideration of adolescent's future partner's desire for biological parenthood (primarily parents); (3) banking while it is a viable option; (4) openness to alternative parenthood options (e.g., adoption/fostering, primary parents).

conclusionsUnderstanding variation in what family members discuss and consider relevant when making FP decisions is an important step toward improving pediatric oncofertility care. Interventions are needed to facilitate family FP-related conversations and optimize decisional satisfaction over time.

Indexed as

Fertility PreservationNeoplasmsAdolescentCommunicationDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaleMothersParentschildhood cancerfamily communicationfertility preservationsperm banking

Identifiers

PMID33629820
PMCPMC8164973
OpenAlexW3131020999

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.