ReviewAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2026
Oncofertility information interventions in patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Fertility problems are increasingly recognized as a critical challenge for patients with cancer. They are associated with diverse health-related outcomes. This study aims to systematically synthesize and evaluate the impact of oncofertility information interventions in patients with cancer. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception to November 21, 2025. Randomized controlled trials using oncofertility information interventions among patients with cancer were included. The risk of bias was evaluated using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE system. Meta-analysis was conducted using R software (version 4.5.1). The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42025641728). Results: A total of 11 articles were included in this systematic review, involving 1046 participants, with 10 articles included in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis showed that oncofertility information interventions could statistically significantly improve patients' fertility-related knowledge (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.37, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 0.01, 0.72; moderate quality of evidence), reducing reproductive concerns (mean difference [MD] = -26.34; 95% CI = -27.86, -24.82; moderate quality of evidence), decisional conflict (MD = -5.83, 95% CI = -10.49, -1.17; moderate quality of evidence), and decisional regret (SMD = -0.57, 95% CI = -1.12, -0.02; low quality of evidence). Subgroup analysis indicated that the non-Asian group, multiple cancers group, multi-session group, online interventions group, and hybrid interventions group were more effective for fertility-related knowledge ( Conclusions: This meta-analysis provides low to moderate quality evidence that oncofertility information interventions were associated with improvements in fertility-related knowledge and reductions in reproductive concerns, decisional conflict, and decisional regret among patients with cancer. Further well-designed and large-scale studies are needed to confirm their effectiveness and to guide broader clinical practice.
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.