Challenging cases in oncofertility: insights from a national specialized e-meeting for fertility preservation specialists
Purpose To determine the use of a new specialized E-Meeting for Complex Cases in Oncofertility by fertility preservation specialists (FPSs) Material and methods We present 3 years of activity of the E-Meeting for Complex Cases in Oncofertility, a new tool created in September 2016 which allows natio...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics 2021-09, Vol.38 (9), p.2445-2453 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2453 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 9 |
| container_start_page | 2445 |
| container_title | Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics |
| container_volume | 38 |
| creator | Khiat, Samuel Pibarot, Michele Roux, Jennifer Bottin, Pauline Saïas, Jacqueline Rives, Nathalie Courbiere, Blandine |
| description | Purpose
To determine the use of a new specialized E-Meeting for Complex Cases in Oncofertility by fertility preservation specialists (FPSs)
Material and methods
We present 3 years of activity of the E-Meeting for Complex Cases in Oncofertility, a new tool created in September 2016 which allows national oncofertility experts to share viewpoints about challenging cases for which they do not have experience or sufficient data in order to provide them an emergency advice within 48 h. Second, a survey was conducted to evaluate the use of this e-meeting for participating FPSs.
Results
One hundred and four experts have joined the e-meeting since its set-up, and 109 challenging cases have been submitted. The mean age of the patients was 22.4 ± 8.9 years, and 87.0% were female. Each submitted case received on average of 1.8 ± 1.1 different strategies for FP and the opinions of 7.1 ± 3.4 experts. Among the FPSs who submitted cases, seeking opinions from other FPSs allowed them to confirm their care plan (
N
= 49, 84.4%), to offer different options to their patients (
N
= 34, 58.6%), and to compare their practices with those of other specialists (
N
= 23, 39.6%). All respondents reported a self-perceived improvement in their practice of oncologic FP (
n
= 80, 100.0%).
Conclusion
Specific attention should be paid to challenging cases for which the experiences of only a few individuals exist. Enhancing communication between FPSs through oncofertility networks, pooling experiences, and collecting the most complex cases is required to improve the management of these patients. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10815-021-02275-1 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8294278</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2578915191</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-793bae8d6853c2cc84470d21a86e73dad58ec171aa8d4c4e40e474a0a0f428053</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kktv1DAUhSMEoqXwB1ggS2xgEbh-jW0WlaoRUKSR2MDacp2bjKvEHuzMSMOvJ2nKAF2wsGxdn_NdP05VvaTwjgKo94WCprIGRqfBlKzpo-qcSsVrxTk8ntYgdQ1ipc-qZ6XcAoDRjD-tzrhghgpqzqvjeuv6HmMXYke8K1hIiCRFn1rMY-jDePwwVUrotmMhbU4DcSS6MaToelJ26IPrw09sCNYD4jhj2pTJyU12GQvmw53lZChjeV49aV1f8MX9fFF9__Tx2_q63nz9_GV9tam9BD3WyvAbh7pZack9814LoaBh1OkVKt64Rmr0VFHndCO8QAEolHDgoBVMg-QX1eXC3e1vBmw8xjG73u5yGFw-2uSC_Xcnhq3t0sFqZgRTegK8XQDbB7brq42da8CZMdyoA520b-6b5fRjj2W0Qyge-95FTPtimZSCS1CrGfv6gfQ27fP0qrNKaUMlNTOQLSqfUykZ29MJKNg5BXZJgZ1SYO9SYGfTq7-vfLL8_vZJwBdBmbZih_lP7_9gfwEq87-l</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2578915191</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Challenging cases in oncofertility: insights from a national specialized e-meeting for fertility preservation specialists</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Khiat, Samuel ; Pibarot, Michele ; Roux, Jennifer ; Bottin, Pauline ; Saïas, Jacqueline ; Rives, Nathalie ; Courbiere, Blandine</creator><creatorcontrib>Khiat, Samuel ; Pibarot, Michele ; Roux, Jennifer ; Bottin, Pauline ; Saïas, Jacqueline ; Rives, Nathalie ; Courbiere, Blandine</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
To determine the use of a new specialized E-Meeting for Complex Cases in Oncofertility by fertility preservation specialists (FPSs)
Material and methods
We present 3 years of activity of the E-Meeting for Complex Cases in Oncofertility, a new tool created in September 2016 which allows national oncofertility experts to share viewpoints about challenging cases for which they do not have experience or sufficient data in order to provide them an emergency advice within 48 h. Second, a survey was conducted to evaluate the use of this e-meeting for participating FPSs.
Results
One hundred and four experts have joined the e-meeting since its set-up, and 109 challenging cases have been submitted. The mean age of the patients was 22.4 ± 8.9 years, and 87.0% were female. Each submitted case received on average of 1.8 ± 1.1 different strategies for FP and the opinions of 7.1 ± 3.4 experts. Among the FPSs who submitted cases, seeking opinions from other FPSs allowed them to confirm their care plan (
N
= 49, 84.4%), to offer different options to their patients (
N
= 34, 58.6%), and to compare their practices with those of other specialists (
N
= 23, 39.6%). All respondents reported a self-perceived improvement in their practice of oncologic FP (
n
= 80, 100.0%).
Conclusion
Specific attention should be paid to challenging cases for which the experiences of only a few individuals exist. Enhancing communication between FPSs through oncofertility networks, pooling experiences, and collecting the most complex cases is required to improve the management of these patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-0468</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-7330</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10815-021-02275-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34291419</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adult ; Cancer ; Ecology, environment ; Female ; Fertility ; Fertility Preservation ; Fertility Preservation - standards ; Gynecology ; Gynecology and obstetrics ; Health ; Health Personnel - psychology ; Human Genetics ; Human health and pathology ; Humans ; Infertility - epidemiology ; Infertility - pathology ; Infertility - therapy ; Life Sciences ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Neoplasms - physiopathology ; Practice Patterns, Physicians' - standards ; Preservation ; Quality Improvement ; Reproductive Medicine ; Retrospective Studies ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2021-09, Vol.38 (9), p.2445-2453</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2021</rights><rights>2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.</rights><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2021.</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-793bae8d6853c2cc84470d21a86e73dad58ec171aa8d4c4e40e474a0a0f428053</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-793bae8d6853c2cc84470d21a86e73dad58ec171aa8d4c4e40e474a0a0f428053</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5615-3933 ; 0000-0002-1847-4509 ; 0000-0001-9102-1111</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8294278/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8294278/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34291419$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-03299397$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Khiat, Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pibarot, Michele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roux, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bottin, Pauline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saïas, Jacqueline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rives, Nathalie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Courbiere, Blandine</creatorcontrib><title>Challenging cases in oncofertility: insights from a national specialized e-meeting for fertility preservation specialists</title><title>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics</title><addtitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</addtitle><addtitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</addtitle><description>Purpose
To determine the use of a new specialized E-Meeting for Complex Cases in Oncofertility by fertility preservation specialists (FPSs)
Material and methods
We present 3 years of activity of the E-Meeting for Complex Cases in Oncofertility, a new tool created in September 2016 which allows national oncofertility experts to share viewpoints about challenging cases for which they do not have experience or sufficient data in order to provide them an emergency advice within 48 h. Second, a survey was conducted to evaluate the use of this e-meeting for participating FPSs.
Results
One hundred and four experts have joined the e-meeting since its set-up, and 109 challenging cases have been submitted. The mean age of the patients was 22.4 ± 8.9 years, and 87.0% were female. Each submitted case received on average of 1.8 ± 1.1 different strategies for FP and the opinions of 7.1 ± 3.4 experts. Among the FPSs who submitted cases, seeking opinions from other FPSs allowed them to confirm their care plan (
N
= 49, 84.4%), to offer different options to their patients (
N
= 34, 58.6%), and to compare their practices with those of other specialists (
N
= 23, 39.6%). All respondents reported a self-perceived improvement in their practice of oncologic FP (
n
= 80, 100.0%).
Conclusion
Specific attention should be paid to challenging cases for which the experiences of only a few individuals exist. Enhancing communication between FPSs through oncofertility networks, pooling experiences, and collecting the most complex cases is required to improve the management of these patients.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Ecology, environment</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fertility</subject><subject>Fertility Preservation</subject><subject>Fertility Preservation - standards</subject><subject>Gynecology</subject><subject>Gynecology and obstetrics</subject><subject>Health</subject><subject>Health Personnel - psychology</subject><subject>Human Genetics</subject><subject>Human health and pathology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infertility - epidemiology</subject><subject>Infertility - pathology</subject><subject>Infertility - therapy</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Neoplasms - physiopathology</subject><subject>Practice Patterns, Physicians' - standards</subject><subject>Preservation</subject><subject>Quality Improvement</subject><subject>Reproductive Medicine</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1058-0468</issn><issn>1573-7330</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kktv1DAUhSMEoqXwB1ggS2xgEbh-jW0WlaoRUKSR2MDacp2bjKvEHuzMSMOvJ2nKAF2wsGxdn_NdP05VvaTwjgKo94WCprIGRqfBlKzpo-qcSsVrxTk8ntYgdQ1ipc-qZ6XcAoDRjD-tzrhghgpqzqvjeuv6HmMXYke8K1hIiCRFn1rMY-jDePwwVUrotmMhbU4DcSS6MaToelJ26IPrw09sCNYD4jhj2pTJyU12GQvmw53lZChjeV49aV1f8MX9fFF9__Tx2_q63nz9_GV9tam9BD3WyvAbh7pZack9814LoaBh1OkVKt64Rmr0VFHndCO8QAEolHDgoBVMg-QX1eXC3e1vBmw8xjG73u5yGFw-2uSC_Xcnhq3t0sFqZgRTegK8XQDbB7brq42da8CZMdyoA520b-6b5fRjj2W0Qyge-95FTPtimZSCS1CrGfv6gfQ27fP0qrNKaUMlNTOQLSqfUykZ29MJKNg5BXZJgZ1SYO9SYGfTq7-vfLL8_vZJwBdBmbZih_lP7_9gfwEq87-l</recordid><startdate>20210901</startdate><enddate>20210901</enddate><creator>Khiat, Samuel</creator><creator>Pibarot, Michele</creator><creator>Roux, Jennifer</creator><creator>Bottin, Pauline</creator><creator>Saïas, Jacqueline</creator><creator>Rives, Nathalie</creator><creator>Courbiere, Blandine</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><general>Springer Verlag</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>VOOES</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5615-3933</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1847-4509</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9102-1111</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210901</creationdate><title>Challenging cases in oncofertility: insights from a national specialized e-meeting for fertility preservation specialists</title><author>Khiat, Samuel ; Pibarot, Michele ; Roux, Jennifer ; Bottin, Pauline ; Saïas, Jacqueline ; Rives, Nathalie ; Courbiere, Blandine</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-793bae8d6853c2cc84470d21a86e73dad58ec171aa8d4c4e40e474a0a0f428053</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Ecology, environment</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fertility</topic><topic>Fertility Preservation</topic><topic>Fertility Preservation - standards</topic><topic>Gynecology</topic><topic>Gynecology and obstetrics</topic><topic>Health</topic><topic>Health Personnel - psychology</topic><topic>Human Genetics</topic><topic>Human health and pathology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infertility - epidemiology</topic><topic>Infertility - pathology</topic><topic>Infertility - therapy</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Neoplasms - physiopathology</topic><topic>Practice Patterns, Physicians' - standards</topic><topic>Preservation</topic><topic>Quality Improvement</topic><topic>Reproductive Medicine</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Khiat, Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pibarot, Michele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roux, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bottin, Pauline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saïas, Jacqueline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rives, Nathalie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Courbiere, Blandine</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL) (Open Access)</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Khiat, Samuel</au><au>Pibarot, Michele</au><au>Roux, Jennifer</au><au>Bottin, Pauline</au><au>Saïas, Jacqueline</au><au>Rives, Nathalie</au><au>Courbiere, Blandine</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Challenging cases in oncofertility: insights from a national specialized e-meeting for fertility preservation specialists</atitle><jtitle>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics</jtitle><stitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</stitle><addtitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</addtitle><date>2021-09-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>2445</spage><epage>2453</epage><pages>2445-2453</pages><issn>1058-0468</issn><eissn>1573-7330</eissn><abstract>Purpose
To determine the use of a new specialized E-Meeting for Complex Cases in Oncofertility by fertility preservation specialists (FPSs)
Material and methods
We present 3 years of activity of the E-Meeting for Complex Cases in Oncofertility, a new tool created in September 2016 which allows national oncofertility experts to share viewpoints about challenging cases for which they do not have experience or sufficient data in order to provide them an emergency advice within 48 h. Second, a survey was conducted to evaluate the use of this e-meeting for participating FPSs.
Results
One hundred and four experts have joined the e-meeting since its set-up, and 109 challenging cases have been submitted. The mean age of the patients was 22.4 ± 8.9 years, and 87.0% were female. Each submitted case received on average of 1.8 ± 1.1 different strategies for FP and the opinions of 7.1 ± 3.4 experts. Among the FPSs who submitted cases, seeking opinions from other FPSs allowed them to confirm their care plan (
N
= 49, 84.4%), to offer different options to their patients (
N
= 34, 58.6%), and to compare their practices with those of other specialists (
N
= 23, 39.6%). All respondents reported a self-perceived improvement in their practice of oncologic FP (
n
= 80, 100.0%).
Conclusion
Specific attention should be paid to challenging cases for which the experiences of only a few individuals exist. Enhancing communication between FPSs through oncofertility networks, pooling experiences, and collecting the most complex cases is required to improve the management of these patients.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>34291419</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10815-021-02275-1</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5615-3933</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1847-4509</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9102-1111</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1058-0468 |
| ispartof | Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2021-09, Vol.38 (9), p.2445-2453 |
| issn | 1058-0468 1573-7330 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8294278 |
| source | MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Adult Cancer Ecology, environment Female Fertility Fertility Preservation Fertility Preservation - standards Gynecology Gynecology and obstetrics Health Health Personnel - psychology Human Genetics Human health and pathology Humans Infertility - epidemiology Infertility - pathology Infertility - therapy Life Sciences Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Neoplasms - physiopathology Practice Patterns, Physicians' - standards Preservation Quality Improvement Reproductive Medicine Retrospective Studies Surveys and Questionnaires Young Adult |
| title | Challenging cases in oncofertility: insights from a national specialized e-meeting for fertility preservation specialists |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T19%3A52%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Challenging%20cases%20in%20oncofertility:%20insights%20from%20a%20national%20specialized%20e-meeting%20for%20fertility%20preservation%20specialists&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20assisted%20reproduction%20and%20genetics&rft.au=Khiat,%20Samuel&rft.date=2021-09-01&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=2445&rft.epage=2453&rft.pages=2445-2453&rft.issn=1058-0468&rft.eissn=1573-7330&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10815-021-02275-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2578915191%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2578915191&rft_id=info:pmid/34291419&rfr_iscdi=true |