ArticleCureus2024
Prevalence, Determinants, and Management Options of Scar Site Pregnancy in Women With Previous Cesarean Section: A Study From the Al-Qassim Region.
Article in Cureus, 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPregnancy located outside the uterine cavity following a cesarean section has become more prevalent in recent years due to the increase in cesarean section delivery. This study sought to investigate the prevalence, determinants, and treatment options of scar site pregnancy among women who sought maternal and child health services in a hospital in Buraydah, Al-Qassim region, Saudi Arabia.
methodsUtilizing a quantitative retrospective case-control design, 50 women were recruited and assigned to the two groups evenly. Demographic data and risk factors were assessed using a questionnaire, and data were analyzed using SPSS version 27 at a 95% confidence interval and presented in tables and figures.
resultsFifty-eight percent of the participants were aged 35 years and above, with 38% reporting a parity of 1-3. Logistic regression revealed that parity (odds ratio (OR) = 10.975, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.887-135.861, and p-value = 0.062), the interval between the last and present pregnancies (OR = 0.056, 95% CI = 0.005-0.668, p-value = 0.023), intrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD) use in the last year (OR = 0.070, 95% CI = 0.006 -0.780, p-value = 0.031) were statistically significant in predicting cesarean scar pregnancy. Combined methotrexate and aspiration were the most prevalent treatment options for scar site pregnancy in this study.
conclusionScar site pregnancy is a maternal health complication that affects women across all healthcare settings, and its prevalence is not clear due to underdiagnosis and underreporting. The risk of scar site pregnancy increased with an increase in the number of childbirths (parity) and the interval between the last and current pregnancies.
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.