ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2013
Routine bimanual pelvic examinations: practices and beliefs of US obstetrician-gynecologists.
Article in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Delayed Visits for Contraception Due to Concerns Regarding Pelvic Examination Among Women with History of Intimate Partner Violence.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Trial
- Where U.S. Women Receive Primary Care: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Prevalence of Potentially Unnecessary Bimanual Pelvic Examinations and Papanicolaou Tests Among Adolescent Girls and Young Women Aged 15-20 Years in the United States.JAMA internal medicine · 2020Article
- Contraceptive use by women across different sexual orientation groups.Contraception · 2019Article
- Effect of professional society recommendations on women's desire for a routine pelvic examination.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2017Article
- Women's beliefs about the purpose and value of routine pelvic examinations.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2017Article
- Obstetrician-gynecologists' beliefs about performing less cervical cancer screening: the pendulum swings.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2015Article
- A need for improved understanding about USPSTF and other evidence-based recommendations.Preventive medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveLess-than-annual cervical cancer screening is now recommended for most US women, raising questions about the need for routine annual bimanual pelvic examinations. Little is known about clinicians' bimanual pelvic examination practices, their beliefs about its importance, or the reasoning underlying its performance in asymptomatic women. STUDY
designWe conducted a nationwide survey of US obstetrician-gynecologists. Respondents (n = 521) reported their examination practices and beliefs based on vignettes for asymptomatic women across the lifespan.
resultsNearly all obstetrician-gynecologists perform bimanual pelvic examinations in asymptomatic women across the lifespan, although it is viewed as less important for a newly sexually active 18-year-old. Reasons cited as very important included adherence to standard medical practices (45%), patient reassurance (49%), detection of ovarian cancer (47%), and identification of benign uterine (59%) and ovarian (54%) conditions.
conclusionObstetrician-gynecologists perform bimanual pelvic examinations in the vast majority of asymptomatic women, but the importance placed on the examinations and reasons for conducting them vary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.