ArticleOncoscience2025
Deciphering radiation effects in pap smears: A case report and review of challenges.
Article in Oncoscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cervical carcinoma remains a major public health issue, especially in developing countries with limited access to screening. The Papanicolaou (Pap) smear is a cost effective, essential diagnostic tool for early detection and post-treatment surveillance of cervical lesions. Conization is used for early-stage disease, while advanced cases are managed with chemoradiation. In the report, a 44-year-old woman treated with hysterectomy and chemoradiation presented with a vault smear showing classic radiation-induced changes e.g. nuclear enlargement with preserved Nuclear: Cytoplasm ratio, cytoplasmic vacuolation and granularity, hyperchromasia with smudged chromatin, multinucleation, degenerative nuclear features including chromatin wrinkling, and occasional bizarre cells. Recognizing these features is vital to prevent misdiagnosis and unnecessary intervention. The present case highlights the need for heightened awareness of post-radiation cytology in clinical practice.
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.