ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2024
Current opinion on large-scale prospective myomectomy databases toward evidence-based preconception and antenatal counselling utilising a standardised myomectomy operation note.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: No large-scale databases exist of pregnancy outcomes and rate of uterine rupture for women after myomectomy, resulting in inconsistent antenatal counselling and decision-making regarding mode and timing of delivery. Standardising information collected at myomectomy may facilitate data collection, informing prenatal/ antenatal counselling. Objectives: To determine clinician opinions regarding standardisation of myomectomy operation notes to allow comprehensive data input into a prospective database of pregnancy outcomes, toward an evidence-based approach to decision making regarding timing and mode of delivery in subsequent pregnancies. Materials and Methods: A google forms survey was emailed to all consultant (attending-level) obstetricians and gynaecologists across 25 hospitals in London, Kent, Surrey, and Sussex (UK) between March and May 2022. To enhance response rates, two further email reminders were sent alongside in-person reminders from selected local unit representatives. Main outcome measures: Senior clinician opinion for characteristics necessary to collect at time of surgery to develop a widescale database of post myomectomy pregnancy outcomes. Results: 209/475 (44%) responses received; 95% (198/209) agreed with standardising operation notes. Criteria selected for inclusion included cavity breach (98%, 194/198), location (98%, 194/198), number of fibroids removed (93%, 185/198) and number of uterine incisions (96%, 190/198). Conclusions: Gynaecologists support standardising myomectomy operation notes to inform the development of prospective large-scale databases of pregnancy outcomes after myomectomy. What is new?: Acquisition of clinician opinions on the development and content of a standardised myomectomy operation note to aid the development of a pregnancy-outcome database for women after myomectomy.
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.