Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35348830›Full record

ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2022

Talc powder and ovarian cancer: what is the evidence?

John P Micha, Mark A Rettenmaier, Randy Bohart, Bram H Goldstein

Abstract readNews
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

John P MichaWomen's Cancer Research Foundation, 699 Diamond Street, Laguna Beach, CA, USA.
Mark A RettenmaierWomen's Cancer Research Foundation, 699 Diamond Street, Laguna Beach, CA, USA.
Randy BohartOso Home Care, Inc., Irvine, CA, USA.
Bram H GoldsteinWomen's Cancer Research Foundation, 699 Diamond Street, Laguna Beach, CA, USA. bram@womenscancerfoundation.com.ORCID 0000-0002-8180-0338

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Talc is a desiccant that has been historically used as baby powder by numerous women to enhance their feminine hygiene. Talc has been identified in proximity to asbestos; accordingly, retrospective and case-control studies have implicated the role of talc use in the development of ovarian cancer, whereas prospective evaluations have not documented concordant findings. Moreover, the positive associations derived from case-control studies have been remote and the putative causal factors remain inconclusive. Consequently, one should be circumspect regarding the assertion that genital talc powder application induces ovarian cancer development.

Indexed as

Ovarian NeoplasmsTalcCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialFemaleHumansPowdersRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsPowdersTalcOvarian cancerPrevalenceRisk factorsTalc use

Identifiers

PMID35348830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.