ArticleBMC medical imaging2023
Evaluation of the stiffness of normal cervix and its change with different factors using transvaginal two-dimensional shear wave elastography under strict quality control.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Two-dimensional ultrasound shear wave elastography: an effective method for assessing fetal rabbit lung maturity.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Ultrasound Elastography in the Diagnosis and Management of Uterine Pathologies: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Endorectal ultrasound with elastography for differentiating benign and malignant rectal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.American journal of translational research · 2025Review
- Article
- Relationship between endometriosis and uterine cervical elasticity assessed using ultrasound strain elastography.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe usefulness of transvaginal two-dimensional shear wave elastography (2D SWE) for cervical lesions is still uncertain. This study was to explore the value of transvaginal 2D SWE in the evaluation of the stiffness of normal cervix and its change with different factors under strict quality control (QC).
methodsTwo hundred patients with normal cervix were included in this study and were examined using quantitative 2D SWE to evaluate cervical stiffness and its change with different factors under strict QC.
resultsIntra-observer concordance of transvaginal 2D SWE parameters in midsagittal planes were acceptable with intraclass correlation coefficients higher than 0.5. Transvaginal 2D SWE parameters were significantly higher than the corresponding transabdominal parameters. 2D SWE parameters of internal cervical os were significantly higher than the corresponding parameters of external cervical os in a transvaginal midsagittal plane. 2D SWE parameters of external cervical os increased significantly over 50 years old, while these parameters of internal cervical os didn't change significantly with increasing age. 2D SWE parameters of internal cervical os of horizontal position cervix were significantly higher than those of vertical position cervix. SWE parameters of normal cervix did not change according to different menstrual cycles, parities and human papilloma virus test results.
conclusionsTransvaginal 2D SWE under strict QC could provide quantitative, repeatable and reliable cervical stiffness information. Internal cervical os was stiffer than external cervical os. Menstrual cycles, parities and human papilloma virus test results wouldn't affect cervical stiffness. However, age and cervical positions should be taken into condition while interpreting 2D SWE results of cervical stiffness.
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.