ReviewComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2022
Controversy on Positive Peritoneal Cytology of Endometrial Carcinoma.
Review in Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- 2023 FIGO Staging of Endometrial Cancer with Molecular Classification: Dawn and Challenges.Journal of Cancer · 2025Article
- A deep learning framework for predicting endometrial cancer from cytopathologic images with different staining styles.PloS one · 2024Article
- Retracted: Controversy on Positive Peritoneal Cytology of Endometrial Carcinoma.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2023-06-28Concerns/Issues about Data · Concerns/Issues about Referencing/Attributions · Concerns/Issues about Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endometrial carcinoma (EC) is one of the most common gynecological malignancies. Its incidence rate has been increasing year by year. The prognostic factors and treatment strategies of EC have aroused wide concern. The effects of peritoneal cytology on the prognosis and treatment of EC remain controversial. Some factors, such as differentiation degree, muscle invasion, and tumor size, are related to positive peritoneal cytology. Hysteroscopy is commonly used in the diagnosis and treatment of endometrial cancer, but hysteroscopic surgery may cause the tumor to spread into the abdominal cavity, resulting in positive peritoneal cytology. In this review, we discuss the factors related to positive peritoneal cytology and the influence of positive peritoneal cytology on the prognosis of endometrial cancer. Suspicious positive peritoneal cytology may be an independent risk factor for endometrial cancer. The positive rate of peritoneal tumor cells in type II endometrial cancer is higher than other cells and is an independent risk factor for type II endometrial cancer. We also discuss the effects of peritoneal cytology on treatment decisions. Aggressive treatments seem to be more beneficial for patients with positive ascites cytology, but there is a lack of large-scale prospective clinical studies on their effectiveness and safety. The application of peritoneal cytology for endometrial cancer has been decreased in recent years. We believe that peritoneal cytology is necessary for this type of cancer. However, more studies on peritoneal cytology in endometrial cancer should be carried out.
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.