SynthesisBMJ clinical evidence2012
Tubal ectopic pregnancy.
Synthesis in BMJ clinical evidence, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic cornuotomy in the surgical management of complete interstitial ectopic pregnancy.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2026Article
- Inflammatory indices, machine learning and artificial intelligence in tubal ectopic pregnancy management.Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2026Article
- Review
- FERTILITY OUTCOMES AFTER MEDICAL AND SURGICAL MANAGEMENT OF TUBAL ECTOPIC PREGNANCY.Acta clinica Croatica · 2022Article
- Mesenteric ectopic pregnancy with tubo-ovarian abscess.Radiology case reports · 2021Article
- Chlamydia trachomatis and mycoplasma infections in tubal pregnancy.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionApproximately 1/100 pregnancies are ectopic, with the conceptus usually implanting in the fallopian tube. Some ectopic pregnancies resolve spontaneously, but others continue to grow and lead to rupture of the tube. Risks are higher in women with damage to the fallopian tubes due to pelvic infections, surgery, or previous ectopic pregnancy. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What treatments improve outcomes in women with unruptured tubal ectopic pregnancy? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to July 2011 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations, such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). The authors also separately searched Medline and Pubmed up to July 2011 in addition to the Clinical Evidence systematic search to support the comments and clinical guide sections.
resultsWe found 19 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
conclusionsIn this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: salpingotomy, salpingectomy, methotrexate, methotrexate following salpingotomy, methotrexate plus mifepristone, and expectant management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22321966PMC3285146What 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.