ArticlePrzeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review2022
Understanding the limits of parametrial resection in radical hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Przeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- International expert consensus on the surgical anatomic classification of radical hysterectomies.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The aim was to evaluate whether adding specific educational medical illustrations may help gynecologists to better understand the limits of parametrial resection in radical hysterectomy from type A to type C2. Study Design: randomized controlled trial. Material and methods: Institute of Obstetric and Gynecologic Pathology, University of Catania, Italy. Materials and methods: 30 senior Obstetrics and Gynecology (Ob/Gyn) residents and 30 general Ob/Gyn consultants were enrolled in the study, and randomized to two groups of 15 people (group A and group B). Both groups had a copy of the article on the Querleu-Morrow Classification of Radical Hysterectomy (2017) for reading comprehension. Group B also had 10 unpublished medical illustrations, prepared for this paper. After one month the level of self-perceived understanding related to parametrectomy limits in radical hysterectomy was evaluated in both groups using a numeric visual analog scale, where each participant evaluated his degree of comprehension. The data were statistically analyzed using the Results: Group A participants (only article) had a lower level of comprehension of parametrectomy limits compared to group B participants (article plus drawings). The difference between the mean scale score, reported by group A, equal to 5.9 ±1.4, and that reported by group B, equal to 7.2 ±1.5, was statistically significant ( Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that educational materials, such as the proposed drawings, may help both Ob/Gyn consultants and residents to better understand the relationship between the extent of parametrial resection and cervical disease severity, and the related postoperative complications.
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.