↓ Skip to main content

Factors associated with the receipt of fertility preservation services along the decision-making pathway in young Canadian female cancer patients

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
Factors associated with the receipt of fertility preservation services along the decision-making pathway in young Canadian female cancer patients
Published in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10815-015-0608-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samantha Yee

Abstract

This study investigated the factors associated with the receipt of fertility preservation (FP) services along the decision-making pathway in young Canadian female cancer patients. The roles of the oncologists were examined. A total of 188 women who were diagnosed with cancer between the ages of 18-39 after the year 2000 and had finished active cancer treatment by the time of the survey (2012-2013) participated in the study. Logistic regression models and Pearson χ (2) tests were used for analyses. The mean ages of participants at diagnosis and at survey time were 30.2 (SD = 3.7) and 33.9 (SD = 5.9). One quarter (n = 45, 23.9 %) did not recall having a fertility discussion with their oncologists. Of the three quarters who had a fertility discussion (n = 143, 76.1 %), discussions were equally initiated by oncologists (n = 71) and patients (n = 72). Of the 49 women (26 %) who consulted a fertility specialist, 17 (9 %) underwent a FP procedure. Fertility concern at diagnosis was the driving force of the receipt of FP services at all decision points. Our findings suggest that not only was the proactive approach of oncologists in initiating a fertility discussion important, the quality of the discussion was equally critical in the decision-making pathway. Oncologists play a pivotal role in the provision of fertility services in that they are not only gate keepers, knowledge brokers, and referral initiators of FP consultation, but also they are catalysts in supporting cancer patients making important FP decision in conjunction with the consultation provided by a fertility specialist.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Other 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Researcher 4 8%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 12%
Psychology 5 10%
Engineering 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 13 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 November 2015.
All research outputs
#19,611,252
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
#1,199
of 1,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,891
of 287,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
#16
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,697 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 287,338 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.