ReviewCancer management and research2020
Relationship of Adherence to Cervical Cancer Treatment Guideline Towards Patients' Five-year Survival: Systematic Review of Follow-up Trials.
Review in Cancer management and research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Failure to follow up abnormal test results associated with cervical cancer in primary and ambulatory care: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Effect of guided imagery relaxation on anxiety in cervical cancer: randomized clinical trial.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2023Trial
- Characterizing trimodal therapy outcomes by HIV status in early-stage cervical cancer: a retrospective cohort study from a Kenyan tertiary centre.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Clinical Practice Guidelines Adherence and the Impact on Health Outcomes in Oncology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2025Article
- Treatment compliance among adult cervical cancer patients receiving care at Uganda cancer institute, Uganda: a retrospective data review.BMC cancer · 2023Article
- Evolution of patterns of care for women with cervical cancer in Morocco over a decade.BMC cancer · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cervical cancer is the one of the most common gynecology malignancies in the world. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines on cervical cancer are widely adopted as national guidelines and clinical practice guidelines. These guidelines are constantly being updated but their effectiveness has not been questioned. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to assess outcomes with/without guideline adherence in the published studies. This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA statement. Searching with strategy on PubMed, ProQuest, Scopus, and Wiley databases resulted in three studies that met all criteria, thus assessed further with Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and assessed qualitatively. All three studies adopt NCCN guidelines. We found that the proportion of adherence to cervical cancer treatment guidelines was low, ranging from 42% to 54%, with violations occurring at various clinical stages. One study stated that early stage cervical cancer was more likely to receive guideline adherence (adjusted OR=5.48; 95%CI: 1.94-15.5;
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.