ReviewInfectious agents and cancer2024
A systematic review of endometrial cancer clinical research in Africa.
Review in Infectious agents and cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recommendations for the treatment of endometrial cancer in settings with limited resources: report from the International Gynecological Cancer Society consensus meeting.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Fueling the Seed: Growth Factors and Cytokines Driving Cancer Stem Cells in Gynecological Malignancies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Global, regional, and national burden of uterine cancer among women aged 50 years and older from 1990 to 2021: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2021.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2025Article
- Exploring women's knowledge and their perception of risk of uterine cancer in Lagos, Nigeria: a multi-facility based cross-sectional study.Ecancermedicalscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWomen in Africa are experiencing a rising burden of endometrial cancer. Research and investment to improve treatment and outcomes are critically needed. We systematically reviewed and characterized endometrial cancer-related research within a clinically relevant context to help organize and assess existing endometrial cancer research in Africa.
methodsAccording to PRISMA guidelines, we searched online databases for published endometrial cancer articles from African countries from January 1, 2011, to July 20, 2021. Based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria, independent reviewers documented the study design, country/region, human development index, focus of research, type of interventions performed, and histologic and molecular type to illustrate the breadth of research coverage in each region.
resultsA total of 18 research articles were included. With an average Human Development Index (HDI) in Africa of 0.536, the average HDI of the represented countries in this study was 0.709. The majority (88.9%) of prospective endometrial cancer research articles in Africa were from North Africa, with Egypt encompassing 83.3% of the papers. Most of these studies focused on endometrial cancer diagnosis. Research on the treatment of endometrial cancer is still emerging (33% of papers). Of all included articles, only 11.1% represented Sub-Saharan Africa, where the majority population of black Africans reside.
conclusionsEndometrial cancer research in Africa is extremely limited, with the majority being concentrated in African countries with higher HDIs. As the incidence of endometrial cancer rises in Sub-Saharan Africa, there is a pressing need for more prospective clinical research to tackle the growing disease burden and improve outcomes.
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.