ArticleJMIR research protocols2023
Fertility Preservation Techniques in Neuro-Oncology Patients: Protocol for a Systematic Review.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reproductive and sexual sequelae of neuroendocrine tumour therapies: an under-recognised challenge.Endocrine-related cancer · 2026Review
- Bridging the Gap: Animal Models in Next-Generation Reproductive Technologies for Male Fertility Preservation.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Fertility preserving techniques in neuro-oncology patients: A systematic review.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdvancements in cancer treatments have successfully improved central nervous system (CNS) cancer survivorship and overall quality of life. As a result, the awareness of the importance of fertility preservation techniques is increasing. Currently, a range of established techniques, such as oocyte cryopreservation and sperm cryopreservation, are available. However, oncologists may be hesitant to refer patients to a reproductive specialist.
objectiveThe primary aim of the proposed systematic review is to assess the best evidence for fertility preservation techniques used in patients with CNS cancers. It also aims to evaluate outcomes related to their success and complications.
methodsThis protocol was produced in adherence with the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols). Electronic databases will be systematically searched to identify studies that meet our eligibility criteria. Studies will be included if they report at least one type of fertility preserving or sparing technique in male patients of any age and female patients aged <35 years. Animal studies, non-English studies, editorials, and guidelines will be excluded from the review. From the included studies, data will be extracted and synthesized by using a narrative approach and summarized in tables. The primary outcome will be the number of patients successfully undergoing a fertility preservation technique. The secondary outcomes will include the number of retrieved oocytes, the number of oocytes or embryos vitrified for cryopreservation, clinical pregnancy, and live birth. The quality of the included studies will be assessed by using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute risk-of-bias tool for any type of study.
resultsThe systematic review is expected to be completed by the end of 2023, and results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and on PROSPERO.
conclusionsThe proposed systematic review will summarize the fertility preservation techniques available for patients with CNS cancers. Given the improvement in cancer survivorship, it is becoming increasingly important to educate patients about fertility preservation techniques. There are likely to be several limitations to this systematic review. Current literature is likely to be of low quality due to insufficient numbers, and there may be difficulty in accessing data sets. However, it is our hope that the results from the systematic review provide an evidence base to help inform the referral of patients with CNS cancers for fertility preservation treatments.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42022352810; https://tinyurl.com/69xd9add. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/44825.
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.