ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2020
Practice patterns using minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of ovarian cancer: A survey of physician members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recurrence Patterns After Complete Cytoreduction for Advanced Ovarian Cancer: Robotic Versus Open Surgery.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive interval debulking surgery for advanced ovarian cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Gynecologic oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Retrospective studies suggest that minimally-invasive surgery may be safe and effective for the treatment of early-stage ovarian cancer as well as interval cytoreduction after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Adoption rates and attitudes towards its use remain largely unknown. We aimed to determine the current use of minimally-invasive surgery for the treatment of ovarian cancer and identify perceived barriers towards further adoption of this method. Electronic survey was administered to physician members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Chi-square analysis was used to determine if any correlation existed between variables and the current use of minimally invasive surgery in general practice and, specifically, for the treatment of ovarian cancer. There was a survey response rate of 15.1%. Sixty-five percent of respondents practiced in an academic setting, and 32.1% of respondents had completed fellowship training within the past 5 years. Ninety percent of respondents were performing >50% of their current procedures using minimally invasive surgery. Over seventy percent of respondents said that they performed minimally invasive surgery for primary staging and interval cytoreductive surgery for the treatment of ovarian cancer. Concern for residual disease and lack of scientific validation were the most frequently cited barriers to the implementation of minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of ovarian cancer. A majority of respondents have adopted the use of MIS for the management of early stage ovarian cancer. Advances in imaging to detect occult tumor deposits and a randomized trial to study and promote the use of minimally invasive surgery in ovarian cancer is warranted.
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.