Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37817213›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

Gynaecologists' perceptions of outpatient gynaecologic and obstetric care in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Carsten Hagenbeck, Johannes Soff, Laura Mause, Jan Hoffmann, Tim Ohnhäuser, Arno Stöcker, Janine Zöllkau, Nadine Scholten

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Carsten HagenbeckDepartment of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany. carsten.hagenbeck@med.uni-duesseldorf.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9890-5435
Johannes SoffFaculty of Human Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research, and Rehabilitation Science, University of Cologne, Eupener Str. 129, 50933, Köln, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0515-9013
Laura MauseFaculty of Human Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research, and Rehabilitation Science, University of Cologne, Eupener Str. 129, 50933, Köln, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7124-7882
Jan HoffmannFaculty of Human Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research, and Rehabilitation Science, University of Cologne, Eupener Str. 129, 50933, Köln, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4154-9270
Tim OhnhäuserFaculty of Human Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research, and Rehabilitation Science, University of Cologne, Eupener Str. 129, 50933, Köln, Germany.
Arno StöckerFaculty of Human Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research, and Rehabilitation Science, University of Cologne, Eupener Str. 129, 50933, Köln, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7685-2731
Janine ZöllkauDepartment of Obstetrics, University Hospital Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1008-3714
Nadine ScholtenFaculty of Human Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Institute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research, and Rehabilitation Science, University of Cologne, Eupener Str. 129, 50933, Köln, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7793-7745
University of Cologne · DEDüsseldorf University Hospital · DEJena University Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The measures taken to contain the COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on society, affecting medical care as well as the utilization of medical services. We aimed to identify pandemic-related changes in gynaecologic/obstetric care through the personal experience of practitioners in the outpatient sector in Germany. Three consecutive anonymous online surveys of practising gynaecologists were conducted during the pandemic (07-09/2020, 11-12/2020 and 09-11/2021). Appointment management, medical supply and patients' demand as well as concomitant circumstances were queried. Data from 860 (393, 262 and 205 from the first, second and third surveys, respectively) respondents were analysed. At the peak of the first COVID-19 wave, more than 50% of the gynaecologists surveyed had cancelled cancer screening appointments. There was a significant association between fear of self-infection and cancellation of cancer screening appointments (p = 0.006). An increase in domestic violence was reported by 13%, an increase in obesity by 67% and more advanced tumours due to delayed screening by 24% of respondents. Primary gynaecological oncological prevention was reduced in supply and demand during the COVID-19 pandemic, and this shortfall should be addressed in future similar situations. Prenatal care has been offered continuously since the start of the pandemic in Germany.

Indexed as

COVID-19Genital Neoplasms, FemaleFemaleGermanyHumansOutpatientsPandemicsPregnancySurveys and QuestionnairesAmbulatory careCOVID-19 pandemicGynaecologic careObstetric care

Identifiers

PMID37817213
PMCPMC10566176
OpenAlexW4387504222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.