ArticleJAMA surgery2025
Gauging the Magnitude of Missed Opportunity for Ovarian Cancer Prevention.
Article in JAMA surgery, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: The impact of salpingectomy on the prevention of high-grade serous cancer (HGSC) at the population level is currently under investigation. Objective: To determine the frequency of missed opportunity for salpingectomy with/without oophorectomy among patients diagnosed with HGSC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This mixed-methods, multi-institutional retrospective study included patients diagnosed with HGSC at 2 academic medical centers between 2015 and 2021. Clinicopathologic data were abstracted from medical records. An electronic survey was also administered to members of a national ovarian cancer organization who self-identified as having had an HGSC diagnosis. The retrospective cohort included 1877 patients with HGSC and the survey included 917 respondents, of which 348 were diagnosed with HGSC. These data were analyzed from May 2023 and August 2023. Exposure: Missed opportunity was defined as a history of either a surgical procedure resulting in permanent contraception (bilateral tubal ligation or hysterectomy without concurrent salpingectomy) at any age or another abdomino-pelvic surgery at 45 years or older when salpingectomy could have been performed 1 year or more preceding a diagnosis of HGSC. Main Outcome and Measure: The proportion of HGSCs that could have been prevented with salpingectomy. Results: Of the 445 patients (23.7%) with missed opportunities for salpingectomy in the retrospective cohort, 241 had a tubal ligation/hysterectomy (54.2%) and 204 had other abdomino-pelvic surgeries (45.8%). Cholecystectomy, hernia repair, and bowel surgeries were more commonly performed for patients 45 years or older than for younger patients. Among the 348 survey respondents, missed opportunity was reported by 54 (15.5%). The study team uncovered a 43.2% missed opportunity rate for germline genetic testing and reflex risk-reducing surgery among patients with an affected first-degree relative in the retrospective cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: A considerable proportion of patients with HGSC missed opportunities for risk assessment with genetic testing and for surgical prevention. Given the lack of effective screening and limited treatment options for HGSC, eradicating it requires addressing the full spectrum of missed opportunities.
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.