ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2025
A multidisciplinary evaluation of fertility preservation for oncology patients in Canada The British Columbia perspective.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInfertility represents a devastating side effect of antineoplastic agents, particularly in adolescents and young adults (AYA). A paucity of practitioner-initiated fertility preservation (FP) counseling has resulted in low uptake of assisted reproductive technologies. There is no dedicated FP program in British Columbia (BC) and few across Canada, leaving patients without adequate support. This study aimed to identify, analyze, and prioritize the FP needs of BC oncology patients, predominantly AYAs, according to healthcare providers.
methodsAn online survey developed by a multidisciplinary team was distributed to practitioners across the British Columbia Cancer Network from March to September 2023. Survey data were analyzed descriptively.
resultsOverall, our survey response rate was 74.2%. Of 120 responses recorded in total, 89 - from 27 oncologists, 58 nurses/nurse practitioners, two family physicians, one fertility specialist, and one care aide - were included in the analysis. While 43.6% of respondents indicated that their patients were likely to be impacted by treatment-related infertility, only 26.8% reported that their patients are usually referred to FP services, and 45.7% reported that their patients receive fertility counseling. Barriers to FP counseling included competing priorities, appointment length, lack of clinical knowledge, urgency to start treatment, perceived futility of FP, and perceived lack of financial resources. Facilitators of FP discussions were awareness, education, financial assistance, provider-initiated discussions, knowledgeable providers, and locally dedicated FP programs.
conclusionsThis study represents the first characterization of interdisciplinary provider practices and beliefs surrounding FP among oncology patients in BC, highlighting the need for an FP program to improve patient care and quality of life. This data can be leveraged nationwide to inform the development and evolution of FP programs for this critically underserved patient population.
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.