ArticleScientific reports2024
Construction and validation of prognostic models for young cervical cancer patients: age stratification based on restricted cubic splines.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of Lymph Node Thresholds as Prognostic Factors in Medullary Thyroid Cancer Staging.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Survival Outcomes and Prognostic Factors for Patients in Early Stage Cervical Cancer: A Multicentric Study in Turkey.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The relationship between liver stiffness, fat content measured by liver elastography, and coronary artery disease: a study based on the NHANES database.Scientific reports · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cervical cancer (CC) ranks as the second highest cause of morbidity and mortality among young women; however, there are currently no age-specific definitions for young cervical cancer or prognostic models tailored to this demographic. Data on CC diagnosed between 2000 and 2019 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Age stratification is based on the relationship between age and cancer-specific mortality, as demonstrated by restricted cubic spline analyses (RCS). Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were employed to identify independent prognostic factors in the young CC group. Two novel nomograms for this population were developed and validated using an external validation cohort obtained from a local hospital database, evaluated with concordance index (C-index) and calibration plots. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were utilized to compare the accuracy of the established models against the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system (2018). A total of 27,658 patients from the SEER database were classified into three age groups (<36 years, 36-60 years, >60 years) based on RCS analyses, with 4,990, 16,922, and 5,746 patients in each group, respectively. The independent prognostic factors identified for young CC included stage, tumour size, grade, histologic type, and surgical intervention. The results of the C-index and calibration in both the training and validation sets confirmed that the two nomograms can accurately predict the occurrence and prognosis of young CC patients. The area under the curve (AUC) values indicated that these models demonstrated higher efficacy in predicting overall survival (OS) compared to the FIGO staging system (2018). These models could potentially serve as effective tools for clinicians to estimate the prognosis of young CC patients.
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.