ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2016
Recommendations on routine screening pelvic examination: Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care adoption of the American College of Physicians guideline.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Consideration of antimicrobial resistance and contextual factors in infectious disease guidelines: a systematic survey.BMJ open · 2021Pooled it
- Practitioners support and intention to adopt universal access to self-collection in Australia's National Cervical Screening Program.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Rapid recommendations: Updates from 2019 guidelines: part 2.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2020Article
- Extent, regional variation and impact of gynecologist payment models in routine pelvic examinations: a nationwide cross-sectional study.BMC women's health · 2017Article
- Evidence that supports policies to delay cervical screening until after age 25 years.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2017Article
- Concern is not based on evidence.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016Article
- Recommendations for the routine screening pelvic examination: Could they have a negative effect on physician competence?Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo review the 2014 American College of Physicians (ACP) guideline on the use of pelvic examinations to screen for cancer (other than cervical), pelvic inflammatory disease, or other benign gynecologic conditions to determine whether the ACP guideline on routine pelvic examinations was consistent with Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC) standards and could be adapted or adopted.
methodsThe SNAP-IT (Smooth National Adaptation and Presentation of Guidelines to Improve Thrombosis Treatment) method was used to determine whether the ACP guideline was consistent with CTFPHC standards and could be adapted or adopted. RECOMMENDATIONS: The CTFPHC recommends not performing a screening pelvic examination to screen for noncervical cancer, pelvic inflammatory disease, or other gynecological conditions in asymptomatic women. This is a strong recommendation with moderate-quality evidence.
conclusionThe CTFPHC adopts the recommendation on screening pelvic examination as published by the ACP in 2014.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26975912PMC4984604W2298234622What 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.