ArticleSpringerPlus2016
Prediction of ovarian function in premenopausal breast cancer patients with amenorrhoea after chemotherapy: a simple clinical score.
Article in SpringerPlus, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recovery of ovarian function after chemotherapy in premenopausal women with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Pooled it
- Association of ABO blood groups with ovarian reserve: a retrospective cohort study in Chinese Han women younger than 40 years with infertility.Journal of ovarian research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated a non-invasive method for predicting the ovarian function of premenopausal breast cancer patients with amenorrhoea after chemotherapy. A total of 34 patients had ovarian function, whereas 56 had no ovarian function. Logistic regression analysis indicated that age (P = 0.034; hazards ratio [HR], 0.29; confidence interval [CI], 0.091-0.910), follicle-stimulating hormone (P = 0.032; HR 0.97; CI 0.944-0.997) and oestradiol (P = 0.047; HR 1.01; CI 1.000-1.015) were independent influencing factors that determine ovarian function. The ovarian function score (OFS) (P < 0.001; HR 48.00; CI 10.174-226.452) was obtained through a comprehensive analysis of these three variables, and it could more effectively predict ovarian function. According to receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the OFS had the highest values compared with the other three variables (sensitivity, 94.6 %; specificity, 79.3 %). The OFS is simple and easy to use; thus, it is expected to become a new method for determining drug-induced amenorrhoea in women with breast cancer. Ovarian function likely still exists if the OFS is ≤1.
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.