ArticleBMC women's health2024
Perceptions and experiences of fertility preservation in female patients with cancer in Greece.
Article in BMC women's health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Shared Decision-Making on Fertility Preservation in Reproductive-Aged Women with Gynecological Cancer: A Qualitative Study of Patients' and Health Care Professionals' Perspectives.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Fertility Preservation in Female Patients with Cancer. Part I: Challenges and Future Prospects in Developing Countries; A Narrative Review Study.International journal of fertility & sterility · 2024Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs advances in oncology have led to remarkable and steady improvements in the survival rates of patients with cancer and anticancer treatment can cause premature ovarian failure in women, fertility preservation (FP) has become a global public health concern and an integral part of the care for women diagnosed with cancer during reproductive age. However, for various reasons, FP remains underutilized for patients with cancer. There are substantial gaps in our knowledge about women's experiences and perceptions of the issue. This study aims to contribute to bridging that gap.
methodsThis prospective qualitative study was conducted from March 2018 to February 2023. A combination of purposive and snowball sampling was used. Data were collected by semistructured interviews with nineteen reproductive-age women who had been recently diagnosed with cancer. Data were classified and analysed with a thematic analysis approach.
resultsA variety of distinct themes and subthemes emerged from the analysis of the interview data. The cancer diagnosis emerged as a factor that considerably affects the women's attitudes towards biological parenthood: It can further increase their (strong) previous desire or decrease their previous (weak) desire. Women with a recent cancer diagnosis had not received adequate and multidisciplinary counselling, including clear and sufficient information. However, participants felt satisfied with the information they received because they either received the information they requested or remained in denial about the need to be informed (i.e., because they felt overwhelmed after the cancer diagnosis). Embryo cryopreservation emerged as a less desirable FP option for women with cancer. Participants showed respect for human embryos, not always for religious reasons. Surrogacy emerged as the last resort for most participants. Religious, social or financial factors did play a secondary (if any) role in women's decision-making about FP. Finally, male partners' opinions played a secondary role in most participants' decision-making about FP. If embryo cryopreservation was the selected option, partners would have a say because they were contributing their genetic material.
conclusionsThe findings that emerged from the data analysis were partly consistent with prior studies. However, we identified some interesting nuances that are of clinical importance. The results of this study may serve as a starting point for future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.