ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2025
Race and ethnicity reporting in endometriosis literature: a systematic review.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 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.
- Association between preeclampsia and eclampsia in Black women with endometriosis: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate reporting of participants' race and ethnicity is essential for assessing the representativeness of study populations and for identifying potential disparities in diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. Objectives: To assess the quantity and quality of race and/or ethnicity reporting in the endometriosis literature. Methods: A systematic review of all human studies reporting data about endometriosis as the primary objective published in 2022. Studies were identified from electronic searches of MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library databases. Main Outcomes Measures: The frequency and quality of participants' race and/or ethnicity reporting based on compliance with the guidelines set by the ICMJE. Study characteristics that influenced the reporting of race and/or ethnicity were assessed. Publications from journals that followed ICMJE recommendations were compared with those from journals that did not. Results: 648/2054 (31.6%) articles met the inclusion criteria. Sixty-five studies (10.0%) reported participants' race and/or ethnicity, and the overall quality of this reporting was poor. The frequency of reporting did not differ between journals adhering to ICMJE guidelines and those that did not (24, 11% vs. 41, 9.5%; Conclusions: The reporting of race and/or ethnicity in human-based endometriosis research remains both infrequent and inconsistent, including in journals claiming adherence to ICMJE standards. These results highlight the need for improved and uniform documentation of racial and ethnic data in endometriosis research. What is New?: Human-based articles focusing on endometriosis have a low frequency and quality of race and/or ethnicity reporting, even in journals claiming to follow ICMJE recommendations.
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.