Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36528586›Full record

SynthesisBMC medicine2022

Contraceptive use and contraceptive counselling interventions for women of reproductive age with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Melissa L Harris, Tesfaye R Feyissa, Nikola A Bowden, Kristina Gemzell-Danielsson, Deborah Loxton

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Women's Health in Oncology.Pharmacotherapy · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

5 authors.

Melissa L HarrisCentre for Women's Health Research, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia. Melissa.Harris@newcastle.edu.au.
Tesfaye R FeyissaCentre for Women's Health Research, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Nikola A BowdenHunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Kristina Gemzell-DanielssonDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Deborah LoxtonCentre for Women's Health Research, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

Australian Research Council DE190101134
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA lack of clarity exists regarding contraceptive uptake and counselling among women with cancer, despite these women having unique family planning needs. This study aimed to systematically review the available literature and produce an overall summary estimate of contraceptive use and counselling among women with cancer across the cancer care continuum.

methodsA systematic search of articles reporting on contraceptive counselling and/or contraceptive use among women of reproductive age (15-49 years) with cancer across the cancer care continuum (e.g. diagnosis, treatment, survivorship) was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Maternity and Infant Care and Cochrane Library. Two independent reviewers conducted the data screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Qualitative synthesis and meta-analyses were conducted to summarise the key findings.

resultsWe included 21 articles involving 3835 participants in this review. Studies varied according to the cancer population and time along the cancer care continuum it was assessed. Of the studies that reported the overall contraceptive prevalence among women diagnosed with cancer (n = 8), contraceptive use ranged from 25 to 92%. Of the four studies that focused on cancer survivors, the contraceptive prevalence ranged from 47 to 84%. When the prevalence of these studies was pooled, a crude summary prevalence of 64% (62% among women with cancer versus 68% among cancer survivors) was found. The rate of contraceptive counselling was assessed in ten studies. A pooled prevalence of 50% (44% among women with cancer versus 58% among cancer survivors) was found, with the prevalence ranging from 12 to 78% among individual studies depending on the point in the cancer care continuum that it was provided. When contraceptive counselling was provided, it was found to significantly increase contraceptive use although biases were identified in its application.

conclusionsContraceptive counselling interventions as part of standard cancer care have the potential to not only empower women with cancer and cancer survivors to make informed choices regarding their reproductive health but also provide the ability to plan future pregnancies for times of better health.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsNeoplasmsAdolescentAdultContraceptive AgentsCounselingFamily Planning ServicesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPregnancyYoung AdultContraceptive AgentsCancerContraceptionContraceptive counsellingInterventionsWomen

Identifiers

PMID36528586
PMCPMC9759910

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.