Risk, Harm, and Prevention of Female Genital Cutting in the U.S.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Dyspareunia and Functioning Among Somali Women Who Have Experienced Female Genital Cutting.Journal of sex research · 2026
   Article
2. Female genital mutilation/cutting experiences and attitudes among women from countries with high prevalence of FGM/C living in the United States: findings from the women's health needs study.Reproductive health · 2026
   Article
3. Response to Commentaries: Understanding Women's Responses to Sexual Pain After Female Genital Cutting.Archives of sexual behavior · 2021
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Response to Commentaries: Understanding Women's Responses to Sexual Pain After Female Genital Cutting.2021
• Comment on
  Understanding Women's Responses to Sexual Pain After Female Genital Cutting: An Integrative Psychological Pain Response Model.2021

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as