ArticleJournal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing2025
Barriers to and Facilitators of Shared Decision-Making Implementation in Fertility Preservation for Patients With Cancer: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing, 2025. 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.
- Development and pilot testing of a web-based decision aid for fertility-preservation decisions among women with cancer in South Korea.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of gynecologic oncology nurses toward patient decision aids for fertility preservation: a cross-sectional study in Zhengzhou, China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Fertility preservation in women with cancer: shared decision-making and the essential role of nurses.Women's health nursing (Seoul, Korea) · 2025Article
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
introductionTo identify the barriers and facilitators in the implementation of fertility preservation (FP) shared decision-making (SDM) in oncology care.
designQualitative descriptive study.
methodsQualitative interviews with 16 female patients with cancer and seven healthcare providers were conducted between July 2022 and April 2024. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis, guided by the implementation science framework.
resultsWe identified 22 categories comprising 38 codes as barriers to SDM implementation and 17 categories comprising 26 codes as facilitators. Findings revealed that, at the innovation level, accessibility, feasibility, interdisciplinary collaboration, and quality improvement efforts were decisive in the implementation of FP SDM. At the individual level, healthcare providers' awareness and attitudes towards FP and SDM, as well as patients' knowledge, attitudes, and capabilities in FP SDM, were crucial factors in the implementation of FP SDM. In social, economic, and organizational contexts, support from significant others, social awareness about FP, multidisciplinary care, financial assistance, and educational resources were determinants in implementing FP SDM.
conclusionImplementing FP SDM among female patients with cancer necessitates a strategic approach that considers barriers and facilitators. Educating and promoting FP SDM among the public and healthcare providers, combined with incentivizing policies, can enhance individual knowledge and awareness while achieving systemic improvements, facilitating its successful implementation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides insights into barriers and facilitators and proposes strategic approaches to enhancing FP SDM implementation, contributing to improved quality of life for cancer survivors and advancements in clinical practice.
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.