Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35130799›Full record

SynthesisWomen's health (London, England)

Oocyte and embryo cryopreservation before gonadotoxic treatments: Principles of safe ovarian stimulation, a systematic review.

Meghan Ch Ozcan, Victoria Snegovskikh, G David Adamson

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Women's health (London, England). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Fertility-sparing options for cancer patients.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
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

3 authors.

Meghan Ch OzcanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Women & Infants Hospital, Providence, RI, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6959-2804
Victoria SnegovskikhDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Women & Infants Hospital, Providence, RI, USA.
G David AdamsonEqual3 Fertility, Cupertino, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveReview the safety of fertility preservation through ovarian stimulation with oocyte or embryo cryopreservation, including cycle and medication options. EVIDENCE REVIEW: A systematic review of peer-reviewed sources revealed 2 applicable randomized control trials and 60 cohort studies as well as 20 additional expert opinions or reviews.

resultsThe capacity for future family building is important for the majority of reproductive age people, despite life-altering medical or oncologic diagnosis. Modern fertility preservation generates a high rate of oocyte yield while utilizing protocols that can be started at multiple points in the menstrual cycle and suppressing supra-physiologic levels of estrogen. Finally, more than one quarter of fertility preservation patients will return to later utilize fertility services.

conclusionFor most patients, fertility preservation can safely be pursued and completed within 2 weeks without affecting disease severity or long-term survival.

Indexed as

Fertility PreservationNeoplasmsCohort StudiesCryopreservationFemaleHumansOocytesOvulation Inductioncancerchemotherapycryopreservationembryosfertility preservationoocytessafety

Identifiers

PMID35130799
PMCPMC8829712

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 Socratic graph.