ReviewDer Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete2009
[Differential diagnosis of condylomata acuminata. Indication for histopathology].
Review in Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Condylomata acuminata: A retrospective analysis on clinical characteristics and treatment options.Heliyon · 2020Article
- [Anogenital warts and HPV-associated precancers : Looking into the recently passed German S2k guideline].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2018Review
- Anogenital Warts in Childhood - Always a Marker for Sexual Abuse?Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2012Article
- [Conservative treatment of anogenital HPV infections].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2011Article
- Clinical and pathological aspects of condyloma acuminatum - review of literature and case presentation.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologieReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Condylomata acuminata are the most frequently diagnosed sexually transmitted disease of the anogenital area worldwide. The basis of successful therapy is the correct diagnosis. There are numerous differential diagnostic considerations, many of which can only be confirmed with histological examination. The diagnosis and differential diagnosis of condylomata acuminata is reviewed. Combining histologic evaluation into the diagnostic approach should improve the therapeutic results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19452137What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.