Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41322796›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

Modern Utility of Pelvimetry: a Relevant Tool or an Outdated Concept?

Margaret R Vitale, Daniel Shtirmer, Bryan P Ashley, Austin C Brown, Sean P Verrier, Stany Lobo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Margaret R VitaleWomen's Health/Anatomical Sciences, Liberty University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Lynchburg, USA.
Daniel ShtirmerAnatomical Sciences, Liberty University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Lynchburg, USA.
Bryan P AshleyAnatomy and Neurosciences, Liberty University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Lynchburg, USA.
Austin C BrownAnatomical Sciences, Liberty University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Lynchburg, USA.
Sean P VerrierAnatomical Sciences, Liberty University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Lynchburg, USA.
Stany LoboAnatomy and Neurosciences, Liberty University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Lynchburg, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of clinical pelvimetry to assess the adequacy of the pelvis for vaginal birth is a controversial subject in modern-day obstetric and gynecological practice. Although it is not considered standard clinical practice in the United States, there is still an emphasis on teaching the concept as part of medical education and within clinical anatomy and obstetrics textbooks. We compiled research studies from the last decade to explore if pelvimetry is clinically useful and question its perceived importance in medical education.

Indexed as

cephalopevic disproportionchildbirthdystociagynecologylaborobstetricspelvimetrypelvis

Identifiers

PMID41322796
PMCPMC12658874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.