ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2022
An assessment of oncofertility content on reproductive endocrinology and infertility clinic websites.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- #infertility in Brazil: an analysis of authorship and post content on Instagram.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo assess oncofertility content on fertility clinic websites as indicated by eight relevant keywords. Additionally, we sought to describe the relationship between oncofertility content and five predetermined clinic characteristics.
methodsWe examined 381 fertility clinic websites that are members of the Society for Associated Reproductive Technology (SART). Extracted data included clinic location, practice type (private vs academic), size (cycles/year), type of NCI designated center (cancer center vs comprehensive cancer center), and distance from the nearest NCI center. Additionally, we documented whether the clinic was located in a state mandating reproductive and infertility services and/or included fertility preservation for "iatrogenic infertility" as reported by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Data were summarized using descriptive statistics and compared using chi-squared or t-test as appropriate.
resultsOf the 381 fertility clinic websites analyzed, 322 (85%) contained at least one oncofertility-related keyword. Most frequently used terms included cancer (79%) and fertility preservation (78%), while less frequently used terms included suppression (9.4%) and shielding (5.0%). Practices that initiated ≥ 501 cycles per year were more likely to mention one of the oncofertility keywords (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.1-1.3). The associations of oncofertility website content with practice type, state-mandated fertility insurance coverage, and distance from an NCI-designated cancer center were not statistically significant. Large clinic size was the only predictive factor for inclusion of oncofertility website content. Further studies are required to evaluate whether inclusion of oncofertility content on clinic websites impacts the use of these services by patients with cancer.
conclusionThis is the first study correlating availability of oncofertility content on SART fertility clinic websites with consideration of geographic proximity to NCI designated cancer centers. Large clinic size was the only predictive factor for inclusion of oncofertility website content.
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.