ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022
Ectopic pregnancy in China during 2011-2020: a single-centre retrospective study of 9499 cases.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of perioperative fertility-related stress and associated factors in women of childbearing age undergoing salpingectomy for ectopic pregnancy: a study based on the health ecology model.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- The body mass index and the risk of ectopic pregnancy: a 5-year retrospective case-control study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- A Rare Case of Diaphragmatic Rupture Due to Ectopic Pregnancy Leading to Haemorrhagic Shock in a Multipara: A Case Report.International journal of women's health · 2024Article
- The impact of maternal electrolyte and albumin levels on the efficacy of single-dose methotrexate treatment for ectopic pregnancies.Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Article
- Global burden and trends of ectopic pregnancy: An observational trend study from 1990 to 2019.PloS one · 2023Observational
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
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have shown that the incidence of ectopic pregnancy (EP) is increasing in China. It is unclear, however, whether the incidence of EP has changed after the implementation of the universal two-child policy in the context of China's aging population and declining fertility rate.
methodsData concerning EP from January 2011 to December 2020 were collected from the hospital's electronic medical records, which included the annual number of delivery, caesarean section rate, ectopic pregnancies, treatment of tubal pregnancy, and average costs and length of hospitalization. Trends of the EP incidence were analysed and annual percentage change (APC) was calculated using connected point regression analyses.
resultsA total of 9499 cases of EP were collected, among which caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) accounts for the second highest (6.73%). The EP per 100 deliveries revealed a downward trend, from 7.60% in 2011 to 4.28% in 2020 with an APC of -1.87 (P < 0.05). The maternal age was increased, especially after the implementation of the universal two-child policy. The constituent ratio for the advanced maternal age (≥ 35) and the caesarean section rate, but not the CSP, were also increased. Laparoscopic salpingectomy was the main surgical method, whereas the adoption of laparotomy and laparoscopic salpingostomy was decreasing year by year.
conclusionsAlthough no obvious effect of the two-child policy on EP has been observed under the conditions of this study, the change in EP especially in advanced-age women after the policy implementation needs further evaluation. A decreased caesarean section rate, in primipara is beneficial to reducing the CSP.
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.