SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2023
Ovarian stimulation and oocyte cryopreservation in females and transgender males aged 18 years or less: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of adolescents and young adults (AYA) attending for fertility counselling and oocyte cryopreservation prior to gonadotoxic treatment.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Female fertility preservation: 25 years of progress, expanding indications and future prospects.Human reproduction update · 2026Review
- Fertility preservation and subsequent reproductive outcomes in female pediatric patients with hematologic malignancies.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- Pubertal Suppression for Transgender Youth: A Right to an Open Future Approach in Support of a Youth-Empowered Legal Framework.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2025Article
- Controlled ovarian stimulation for oocyte preservation in childhood cancer survivors who have undergone chemotherapy.Human reproduction open · 2025Article
- Fertility preservation: is there a model for gender-dysphoric youth?Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Review
- Clinical and ethical perspectives of ovarian stimulation and oocyte cryopreservation in adolescents: 6 years experience from a tertiary centre.Human reproduction open · 2025Article
- REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH IN TRANS AND GENDER DIVERSE PATIENTS: Contraception considerations in transmasculine and gender diverse adolescents and young adults.Reproduction (Cambridge, England) · 2025Review
- Reproductive Health in Women with Major β-Thalassemia: Evaluating Ovarian Reserve and Endocrine Complications.Metabolites · 2024Review
- Strategies for Advancing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data Collection in Cancer Research.JCO oncology practice · 2024Article
- Puberty Suppression for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria and the Child's Right to an Open Future.Archives of sexual behavior · 2024Article
- Current Position of Oncofertility in Adolescent Female Cancer Patients: A Comparative Review on Society Guidelines.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Review
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Fertility preservation is an important healthcare focus in the paediatric and adolescent population when gonadotoxic treatments are required. Ovarian stimulation (OS) resulting in oocyte cryopreservation is a well-established fertility preservation option in the adult population. It's utility, however, is little known in young patients. The purpose of this review was to synthesise the available literature on OS in patients ≤18 years old, to identify gaps in current research and provide suggestions for future research directions. Methods: Using PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of the literature was performed for all relevant full-text articles published in English in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Google Scholar databases. The search strategy used a combination of subject headings and generic terms related to the study topic and population. Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Characteristics of the studies, objectives and key findings were extracted and summarised in a narrative synthesis. Results: Database search and manual review identified 922 studies, 899 were eliminated based on defined exclusion criteria. Twenty-three studies were included and comprised 468 participants aged ≤18 years who underwent OS (median 15.2, range 7-18 years old). Only three patients were premenarchal, and four patients were on treatment to suppress puberty. Patients had OS for a broad range of indications including oncology treatment, transgender care and Turner syndrome. A total of 488 cycles of OS were completed, with all but 18 of these cycles (96.3%) successfully resulting in cryopreserved mature oocytes (median 10 oocytes, range 0-35). Fifty-three cycles (9.8%) were cancelled. Complications were rare (<1%). One pregnancy was reported from a female who had OS aged 17 years old. Conclusion: This systematic review demonstrates that OS and oocyte cryopreservation is achievable in young females however there are only a few cases in the literature describing OS in premenarcheal children or those who have suppressed puberty. There is little proof that OS can lead to pregnancy in adolescents, and no proof that this can be achieved in premenarchal girls. Therefore it should be regarded as an innovative procedure for adolescents and experimental for premenarcheal girls. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=265705, identifier CRD42021265705.
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.