SynthesisThe oncologist2022
Perspectives of Young Women With Gynecologic Cancers on Fertility and Fertility Preservation: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in The oncologist, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in the application of assisted reproductive technology in fertility preservation for female patients with malignant tumours of the reproductive systems.Annals of medicine · 2026Review
- Spiritual needs, spiritual well-being and related factors among patients with gynecologic cancer: A cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Case Report: Successful natural conception and delivery in a primary cancer survivor involving the reproductive, respiratory, and endocrine systems auth.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Impacts of Self-Esteem and Self-Perceived Burden on Health-Related Quality of Life Among Patients with Ovarian Cancer: Does Age Matter?Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Menstrual, reproductive, and contraceptive factors associated with cervical cancer in women aged ≤35 years: an individually matched case-control study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Molecular Prognosticators Guiding Fertility-Sparing Surgery in Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- A life put on hold? Navigating fertility-related considerations after cancer in adolescence and young adulthood (AYA).Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- Perinatal and childhood outcomes of children born to female cancer survivors in South Korea.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Review
- Identifying barriers individuals face in accessing fertility care after a gynecologic cancer diagnosis.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2023Article
- Reproductive Results in Cancer Survivors after Fertility Sparing Management: The Need for the Standardization of Definitions.Cancers · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGynecologic cancers standard treatment often requires the removal of some reproductive organs, making fertility preservation a complex challenge. Despite heightened oncofertility awareness, knowledge about fertility attitudes and decisions of young patients with gynecologic cancer is scarce. The aim of this systematic review was to highlight what is currently known about knowledge, attitudes, and decisions about fertility, fertility preservation, and parenthood among these patients.
methodsPeer-reviewed journals published in English were searched in PubMed, Web of Science and EMBASE from January 1, 2000 to July 1, 2020. Childbearing, fertility, fertility preservation, pregnancy, and parenthood attitudes/decisions after gynecologic cancer from women's perspective were evaluated.
resultsA total of 13 studies comprised the review. Most of the women valued fertility preservation procedures that could be regarded as a means to restore fertility. A unique feature identified was that fertility preservation was seen also as a way to restore gender identity perceived to be lost or threatened during diagnosis and treatment. Fertility counseling was suboptimal, with wide variability among studies reviewed. Comparisons between gynecologic cancers and other cancer types about fertility counseling rates were inconclusive. The potential negative impact of impaired fertility on patients' mental health and quality of life was also documented.
conclusionsFertility and parenthood were important matters in patients' lives, with the majority of patients expressing positive attitudes toward future childbearing. Results confirm that the inclusion of patients with gynecologic cancer in research studies focusing on this topic still remains low. Additionally, the provision of fertility counseling and referral by health professionals is still suboptimal.
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.