ReviewExpert review of endocrinology & metabolism2025
Fertility preservation options at cancer diagnosis; classifying use and decision-making in the United States.
Review in Expert review of endocrinology & metabolism, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Acceptance rates and reasons for social oocyte cryopreservation among women: systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Pooled it
- Fertility-Preservation Knowledge, Perceived Barriers, and Tokophobia Among Female Oncology Patients: The Moderating Role of Psychological Capital.SAGE open nursingArticle
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
Abstract
introductionIncidence rates for cancer among adolescent and young adults (AYA) have increased 30% since 1970. Declines in mortality underscore the importance of discussing fertility preservation (FP) options prior to receiving gonadotoxic treatments. National guidelines outline FP options including oocyte (OC), embryo (EC), and ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) for female AYA patients. Significant progress has led to changes in FP practices, initially limited to EC. Subsequently, OC was deemed non-experimental in 2013, followed by OTC in 2020. Despite these advancements and guideline recommendations, the availability and utilization of FP services vary. AREAS COVERED: Rapid review methodologies were employed to classify trends in female AYAs utilization of FP cryopreservation options following guideline updates. FP options reviewed include OC, EC, and OTC. Additionally, the review examined if aspects of the decision-making process relevant to FP were present. EXPERT OPINION: Ten articles met inclusion criteria. Results suggest that the declassification of OTC has not necessarily increased its use and OC and EC appear to be most frequently used. The factors associated with decision making appear to have remained consistent with financial constraints having the most impact, followed by partner status and concerns about recurrence.
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.