Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37137500›Full record

ReviewCold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine2023

Prevention of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.

Thomas A Sellers, Lauren C Peres, Cassandra A Hathaway, Shelley S Tworoger

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Thomas A SellersDivision of Oncological Sciences, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon 97239, USA.
Lauren C PeresDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, Florida 33612, USA.
Cassandra A HathawayDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, Florida 33612, USA.
Shelley S TworogerDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, Florida 33612, USA Shelley.Tworoger@moffitt.org.
Moffitt Cancer Center · USOregon Health & Science University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the challenges with achieving effective and durable treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer, primary prevention is highly desirable. Fortunately, decades of research have provided evidence for several strategies that can be deployed to optimize risk reduction. These include surgery, chemoprevention, and lifestyle factor modifications. These broad categories vary in terms of the magnitude of risk reduction possible, the possible short-term and long-term side effects, the degree of difficulty, and acceptability. Thus, the concept of a risk-based model to personalize preventive interventions is advocated to guide discussion between care providers and women at risk. For women with inherited major gene mutations that greatly increase risk of ovarian cancer, surgical approaches have favorable risk to benefit ratios. Chemoprevention and lifestyle factor modifications portend a lower degree of risk reduction but confer lower risk of undesirable side effects. Since complete prevention is not currently possible, better methods for early detection remain a high priority.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerOvarian NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialFemaleHumansLife StyleMutation

Identifiers

PMID37137500
PMCPMC10411689
OpenAlexW4368318045

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.