MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375864448 · doi:10.3389/fendo.2023.1148314

National oncofertility registries around the globe: a pilot survey

2023· article· en· W4375864448 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Noelle Ozimek, Mahmoud Salama, Teresa K. Woodruff

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Endocrinology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOncofertilityMedicineFertility preservationFamily medicineGeographyFertilityEnvironmental healthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Oncofertility is an emerging discipline which aims to preserve fertility of young cancer patients. As fertility preservation services have become increasingly available to cancer patients in many countries around the globe, it is crucial to establish a foundation of collaborative reporting to continuously monitor and assess oncofertility practices. This survey study investigates the current global landscape of official national oncofertility registries, a vital tool which allows for surveillance of the field. Methods: An online pilot survey was conducted to give the opportunity to report official national oncofertility registries available in 2022. Survey questions covered the availability of official national registries for oncofertility as well as the official national registries for cancer and assisted reproductive technologies. Participation in the survey was voluntary, anonymous and for free. Results: According to our online pilot survey, responses were collected from 20 countries including Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Egypt, Germany, Greece, India, Japan, Kenya, Philippines, Romania, South Africa, Thailand, Tunisia, UK, USA & Uruguay. Only 3 out of the 20 surveyed countries have well-established official national oncofertility registries; and include Australia, Germany & Japan. The Australian official national oncofertility registry is part of Australasian Oncofertility Registry that also includes New Zealand. The German official national oncofertility registry is part of FertiPROTEKT Network Registry for German speaking countries that also includes Austria & Switzerland. The Japanese official national oncofertility registry includes Japan only and called Japan Oncofertility Registry (JOFR). A supplementary internet search confirmed the aforementioned results. Therefore, the final list of countries around the globe that have official national oncofertility registries includes Australia, Austria, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, and Switzerland. Some other countries such as the USA and Denmark are on their way to establish official national registries for oncofertility care. Conclusion: Although oncofertility services are expanding globally, very few countries have well-established official national oncofertility registries. By reviewing such a global landscape, we highlight the urgent need for having a well-established official national oncofertility registry in each country to monitor oncofertility services in a way that best serves patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in EndocrinologySame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207