ArticleInternational journal of women's health2025
Shared Decision-Making on Fertility Preservation in Reproductive-Aged Women with Gynecological Cancer: A Qualitative Study of Patients' and Health Care Professionals' Perspectives.
Article in International journal of women's health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF), this study aimed to explore the experiences, perceived barriers, and support needs of both reproductive-aged women with gynecological cancer and health care professionals (HCPs) during the process of fertility preservation (FP) shared decision-making (SDM), in order to identify alignments and discrepancies between the two groups. Patients and methods: A descriptive phenomenological qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with reproductive-aged women diagnosed with gynecological cancers and HCPs from gynecology, oncology, and reproductive medicine specialties. Patients were recruited via hospital records during outpatient visits or hospitalization, and professionals via departmental announcements and invitations. The ODSF informed the development of the interview guide. Data were analyzed using Colaizzi's descriptive phenomenological method. Results: A total of 11 reproductive-aged women with gynecological cancer and 12 multidisciplinary HCPs participated in the study. Among the HCPs, 7 were physicians and 5 were nurses. Analysis yielded 35 meaning unites, which were clustered into two main themes: gaps and fragmentation in meeting decisional needs and facilitators of high-quality fertility preservation decision support. Conclusion: This study suggests that FP SDM among reproductive-aged women with gynecological cancer in China may be influenced by multiple challenges, including limited and untimely information, fragmented referral mechanisms, psychological distress, financial concerns, and sociocultural factors. Multidisciplinary team involvement, nursing support, and culturally adapted decision aids may help enhance patient participation, support preference-sensitive decision-making, and reduce decisional conflict. These findings indicate that integrating structured counseling processes, optimizing multidisciplinary pathways, and developing personalized, culturally sensitive decision aids may contribute to more patient-centered fertility care.
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.