Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37916025›Full record

ArticleJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2023

Comparison of Sampling Devices for Endocervical Curetting.

Clement Akinfolarin Adepiti, Kayode Olusegun Ajenifuja

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 88% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Clement Akinfolarin AdepitiObafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals' Complex, Ile-Ife, Osun State Nigeria.ORCID 0000-0001-7210-6670
Kayode Olusegun AjenifujaObafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals' Complex, Ile-Ife, Osun State Nigeria.
Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals Complex · NG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Endocervical curetting (ECC) is mandatory when colposcopy is inadequate or when the Pap smear suggests glandular lesion. When the curette is used, ECC is painful; this necessitated the development of the endocervical brush. There is no consensus on which device yields more sample, detects true cervical precancer (CIN2+) better or highlights the effects of age and parity on ECC yield. Objective: To compare ECC yield and the ability to pick up CIN2+ by the different devices and effect of parity and age on yield. Method: Three hundred women referred for colposcopy following positive cervical high-risk HPV DNA test who had inadequate colposcopic examination were randomly allocated to curette, brush and curette and brush groups for ECC. All samples were sent for histology, and the results were compared. Result: Of the 300 women, 103, 100 and 97 had ECC with curette, brush and curette and brush, respectively. Samples were adequate in 92 (89.3%) of the curette, 69 (69.0%) of the brush and 78 (80.4%) of the curette and brush groups. The curette and curette and brush yielded more samples ( Conclusion: Curette and the curette and brush yielded more samples compared with the brush alone. However, CIN2+ pick-up was similar across all sampling devices.

Indexed as

BrushColposcopyCuretteEndocervixPrecancer

Identifiers

PMID37916025
PMCPMC10616047
OpenAlexW4376141233

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.