Vaidehi Mujumdar1,2, Kavya Shivashankar3, Rachel Madding3, Ariel T Levy4, Sushmita Gordhandas5, Norman G Rosenblum6, Scott Richard6, Brent Monseur7. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, 833 Chestnut Street, 1st Floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA. vaidehi.mujumdar@mountsinai.org. 2. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Science, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, NYC Health and Hospitals, 82-86 164 St, New York, NY, 11432, USA. vaidehi.mujumdar@mountsinai.org. 3. Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, 1025 Walnut St #100, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA. 4. Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, 1305 York Ave, New York, NY, 10021, USA. 5. Gynecology Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 6. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, 925 Chestnut Street, Suite 320A, Philadelphia, PA, 19017, USA. 7. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford Hospital and Clinics, 1195 W. Fremont Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA, 94087, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess oncofertility content on fertility clinic websites as indicated by eight relevant keywords. Additionally, we sought to describe the relationship between oncofertility content and five predetermined clinic characteristics. METHODS: We examined 381 fertility clinic websites that are members of the Society for Associated Reproductive Technology (SART). Extracted data included clinic location, practice type (private vs academic), size (cycles/year), type of NCI designated center (cancer center vs comprehensive cancer center), and distance from the nearest NCI center. Additionally, we documented whether the clinic was located in a state mandating reproductive and infertility services and/or included fertility preservation for "iatrogenic infertility" as reported by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Data were summarized using descriptive statistics and compared using chi-squared or t-test as appropriate. RESULTS: Of the 381 fertility clinic websites analyzed, 322 (85%) contained at least one oncofertility-related keyword. Most frequently used terms included cancer (79%) and fertility preservation (78%), while less frequently used terms included suppression (9.4%) and shielding (5.0%). Practices that initiated ≥ 501 cycles per year were more likely to mention one of the oncofertility keywords (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.1-1.3). The associations of oncofertility website content with practice type, state-mandated fertility insurance coverage, and distance from an NCI-designated cancer center were not statistically significant. Large clinic size was the only predictive factor for inclusion of oncofertility website content. Further studies are required to evaluate whether inclusion of oncofertility content on clinic websites impacts the use of these services by patients with cancer. CONCLUSION: This is the first study correlating availability of oncofertility content on SART fertility clinic websites with consideration of geographic proximity to NCI designated cancer centers. Large clinic size was the only predictive factor for inclusion of oncofertility website content.
PURPOSE: To assess oncofertility content on fertility clinic websites as indicated by eight relevant keywords. Additionally, we sought to describe the relationship between oncofertility content and five predetermined clinic characteristics. METHODS: We examined 381 fertility clinic websites that are members of the Society for Associated Reproductive Technology (SART). Extracted data included clinic location, practice type (private vs academic), size (cycles/year), type of NCI designated center (cancer center vs comprehensive cancer center), and distance from the nearest NCI center. Additionally, we documented whether the clinic was located in a state mandating reproductive and infertility services and/or included fertility preservation for "iatrogenic infertility" as reported by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Data were summarized using descriptive statistics and compared using chi-squared or t-test as appropriate. RESULTS: Of the 381 fertility clinic websites analyzed, 322 (85%) contained at least one oncofertility-related keyword. Most frequently used terms included cancer (79%) and fertility preservation (78%), while less frequently used terms included suppression (9.4%) and shielding (5.0%). Practices that initiated ≥ 501 cycles per year were more likely to mention one of the oncofertility keywords (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.1-1.3). The associations of oncofertility website content with practice type, state-mandated fertility insurance coverage, and distance from an NCI-designated cancer center were not statistically significant. Large clinic size was the only predictive factor for inclusion of oncofertility website content. Further studies are required to evaluate whether inclusion of oncofertility content on clinic websites impacts the use of these services by patients with cancer. CONCLUSION: This is the first study correlating availability of oncofertility content on SART fertility clinic websites with consideration of geographic proximity to NCI designated cancer centers. Large clinic size was the only predictive factor for inclusion of oncofertility website content.
Authors: Kathryn J Ruddy; Shari I Gelber; Rulla M Tamimi; Elizabeth S Ginsburg; Lidia Schapira; Steven E Come; Virginia F Borges; Meghan E Meyer; Ann H Partridge Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-02-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Caroline S Dorfman; Juliann M Stalls; Coleman Mills; Shannon Voelkel; Mallori Thompson; Kelly S Acharya; Karen C Baker; Lars M Wagner; Nolan Miller; Amy Boswell; Cheyenne Corbett Journal: J Oncol Navig Surviv Date: 2021-10
Authors: Alison W Loren; Pamela B Mangu; Lindsay Nohr Beck; Lawrence Brennan; Anthony J Magdalinski; Ann H Partridge; Gwendolyn Quinn; W Hamish Wallace; Kutluk Oktay Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Melody A Rasouli; Christopher de Haydu; Angela H Liu; Janelle M Jackman; Kajal Verma; Sriram Eleswarapu; Cindy M Duke Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2021-09-02 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Matteo Lambertini; Lucia Del Mastro; Maria C Pescio; Claus Y Andersen; Hatem A Azim; Fedro A Peccatori; Mauro Costa; Alberto Revelli; Francesca Salvagno; Alessandra Gennari; Filippo M Ubaldi; Giovanni B La Sala; Cristofaro De Stefano; W Hamish Wallace; Ann H Partridge; Paola Anserini Journal: BMC Med Date: 2016-01-04 Impact factor: 8.775