Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38034134›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

Preservation of Fertility in Cancer Patients: A Narrative Review.

Chehak Bewtra, Neema Acharya

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chehak BewtraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education & Research (Deemed to be University), Wardha, IND.
Neema AcharyaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education & Research (Deemed to be University), Wardha, IND.
Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The survival rates for cancer patients have been steadily improving in recent years due to the improved efficacy of contemporary oncological care, including radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Modern technology makes it feasible to maintain fertility in cancer patients, and this practice needs to be included in oncological care. In many instances, it is impossible to avoid the harm that cancer treatments can cause to a patient's fertility; hence, research in fertility preservation techniques is being conducted to allow cancer patients to have future children biologically related to them. The development of fertility preservation approaches has grown in importance in the field of research over the past few years to increase patient's quality of life and survival. Oncologists must be aware of circumstances in which cancer patients' fertility will be impacted by their therapy and the avenues open for procedures like cryopreservation of the gametes or embryos. When cancer therapy is scheduled, all patients should receive prompt and thorough information on the fertility-related side effects of treatment and the prospects for fertility preservation. The article analyzes the literature, enlisting the factors that contribute to cancer and their effects on fertility, followed by a list of available and newly developed strategies for maintaining fertility in patients. The efficiency of the various fertility preservation techniques following cancer therapy is also discussed.

Indexed as

cancerfemalefertility preservationmaleoncofertility

Identifiers

PMID38034134
PMCPMC10684029
OpenAlexW4388007917

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.