ArticleCancers2025
CO
Article in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Vaginal pixel CO2 laser versus topical use of promestriene for genitourinary syndrome of menopause.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2026Trial
- Vaginal Laser Treatment for Genitourinary Syndrome of the Menopause: A Dose-Determining Study in Breast Cancer Survivors.Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2026Article
- Fractional CO₂ vaginal laser therapy for genitourinary syndrome of menopause in breast cancer survivors: a scoping review.Lasers in medical science · 2026Article
- Fractional COInternational urogynecology journal · 2026Review
- Next-Generation Nerve-Sparing Techniques in Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: A Contemporary Review.Current urology reports · 2025Review
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
Abstract
objectivesWe aimed to study the efficacy of fractional CO
methodsBC survivors with GSM were randomized to receive either three sessions of intravaginal CO
resultsThirty-four BC survivors were randomized to laser (n = 19) or sham (n = 15) treatments. Dyspareunia and intercourse dryness scores improved in both groups one month post-treatment, without a significant advantage of laser over sham. The laser treatment resulted in a reduction in daily dryness (-1.30 ± 0.55,
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.