Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30130293›Full record

ArticleMenopause (New York, N.Y.)2019

WISDOM survey: attitudes and behaviors of physicians toward vulvar and vaginal atrophy (VVA) treatment in women including those with breast cancer history.

Sheryl A Kingsberg, Lisa Larkin, Michael Krychman, Sharon J Parish, Brian Bernick, Sebastian Mirkin

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Menopause (New York, N.Y.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05585476 (Effectiveness of C02 Microfractionated Laser in Conjunction With Topical Regenerative Therapy in the Management of Vulvo-vaginal Atrophy in Patients With a History of Breast Cancer. Randomized Experimental and Comparative Study.), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05585476 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness of C02 Microfractionated Laser in Conjunction With Topical Regenerative Therapy in the Management of Vulvo-vaginal Atrophy in Patients With a History of Breast Cancer. Randomized Experimental and Comparative Study.

TypeinterventionalSponsorInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria de la Fundación Jiménez DíazRan2025 to 2026Enrolled180ConditionsFemale Urogenital Diseases, Breast Cancer FemaleArmsC02 microablative laser, Regenerative topical treatment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Investigation ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Sheryl A KingsbergUniversity Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, MacDonald Women's Hospital, Cleveland, OH.
Lisa LarkinLisa Larkin MD and Associates, Mariemont, OH.
Michael KrychmanSouthern California Center for Sexual Health and Survivorship Medicine Inc., Newport Beach, CA.
Sharon J ParishWeill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY.
Brian BernickTherapeuticsMD, Boca Raton, FL.
Sebastian MirkinTherapeuticsMD, Boca Raton, FL.
TherapeuticsMD (United States) · USCornell University · USSouthern California Reproductive Center · USWomen's Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate and compare physicians' behaviors and attitudes regarding vulvar and vaginal atrophy (VVA) treatment in menopausal women, including women with breast cancer, using an internet-based survey.

methodsThe WISDOM survey queried obstetricians and gynecologists (OB/GYNs) and primary care physicians (PCPs) with 23 multipart questions assessing behaviors and attitudes towards VVA treatment.

resultsOf 2,424 surveys sent, 945 (39%) responded and 644 (27%) were completed. Of the menopausal women seen by OB/GYNs and PCPs, 44% to 55% reported having VVA symptoms. Physicians prescribed VVA treatments primarily because of effectiveness. Only 34% of OB/GYNs and 17% of PCPs felt comfortable prescribing VVA therapies to women with a personal history of breast cancer. In general, the most common VVA treatment recommended by all was prescription therapy (49%; with or without other therapies) in the form of US Food and Drug Administration-approved vaginal estrogen creams. More OB/GYNs (72%) than PCPs (47%) disagreed that VVA was best treated with over the counter than prescription products. Out-of-pocket cost and fear of risks associated with estrogens were believed to be the main barriers for why women choose not to get treated and why they discontinue treatment.

conclusionsMore OB/GYNs than PCPs prescribed VVA treatment, especially vaginal estrogens, for menopausal women, but both groups generally had similar attitudes and behaviors regarding VVA treatment. Physician comfort was low when prescribing to women with a history of breast cancer, despite women's health medical societies supporting vaginal estrogen use in women with a history of estrogen-dependent breast cancer who were unresponsive to nonhormonal therapies when offered in consultation with their oncologist.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdministration, IntravaginalAdultAtrophyBreast NeoplasmsEstrogensFemaleHumansMenopauseMiddle AgedOncologistsPhysiciansSurveys and QuestionnairesVaginaVaginal Creams, Foams, and JelliesVaginal DiseasesEstrogensVaginal Creams, Foams, and Jellies

Identifiers

PMID30130293
PMCPMC6365251
OpenAlexW2888720707

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.