ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Limitations and perspectives of the novel salivary test for endometriosis: an open web-based survey study of German gynecologic healthcare providers.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- N-Acetylcysteine in Endometriosis: A Systematic Review of Biological Rationale and Clinical Evidence.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe description of a salivary miRNA signature for endometriosis has led to the development of a non-invasive diagnostic test. Current healthcare provider practices regarding the test remain uncaptured. The application of this test in practice was examined in a web-based survey, with the aim to provide their opinions on it.
methodsWe conducted an open web-based survey study between November 2023 and January 2024. Members of the German society of gynecologic endoscopy (Arbeitsgemeinschaft gynäkologische Endoskopie, AGE), society of endometriosis (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Endometriose, AGEM), and the endometriosis research foundation (Stiftung Endometriose Forschung, SEF) were contacted per e-mail twice. Participants' data were anonymized. Differences in responses based on self-reported expertise in the field (basic knowledge, specialized knowledge, expert) were assessed using the χ
resultsIn total 141 of 190 respondents completely responded to the survey (> 75% of the questions of the survey). Twenty-one physicians reported having experience with the test, while most participants had at least specialized knowledge on the field (112/141). In terms of specific questions, more than 90% found the costs high; almost 85% did not believe that the test replaces standard diagnostic tools (histology, clinical examination, and sonography). Eighty-six providers supported the use of the test in adolescents. Gynecologists with basic knowledge had a more positive attitude compared with more experienced ones in terms of usefulness (Fisher's exact test, p < 0.001). Significant differences were demonstrated between expertise groups regarding (not only) applicability in adolescents (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.004), and using the test for screening purposes (χ DISCUSSION: Despite the promising benefits of a salivary test for endometriosis, German healthcare providers would not change current practices. Nevertheless, less experienced colleagues were more positive towards the test.
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.