ArticleCureus2025
Physicians' Perceptions of Intravenous Estrogen for the Management of Acute Abnormal Uterine Bleeding.
Article in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Acute abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a common gynecologic complaint for which patients seek treatment. While many reasonable options exist for the management of AUB, the only Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved treatment option for acute AUB is intravenous (IV) conjugated estrogen. Our study aimed to investigate physicians' preferences for the management options of acute AUB and specifically examine their opinions regarding IV estrogen. Methods We created an electronic survey that was emailed to Obstetrics & Gynecology (OBGYN), Emergency Medicine (EM), and Internal Medicine (IM) physicians. Responses to the study were analyzed. Frequencies and percentages were reported to summarize survey responses. Cumulative or ordinal logistic regression models were used to estimate the effects of predictors on the odds of a higher likelihood or preference for prescribing IV estrogen for acute AUB. Results A total of 39 physicians responded to the survey. Only 6 (15.38%) indicated IV estrogen as their first-line choice for management of acute AUB. Only 13 participants (33.33%) indicated that they were comfortable prescribing IV estrogen. The most common indication for not prescribing IV estrogen was being unfamiliar with the typical regimen (18/26, 69.23%). Overall, OBGYN resident physicians were the most likely to feel comfortable prescribing IV estrogen. Conclusions Only a little over half of all participants correctly identified IV estrogen as being FDA-approved for the management of acute AUB. Approximately one-third of participants indicated that they were comfortable prescribing IV estrogen, while a near majority of participants indicated they were unfamiliar with the typical regimen. Future direction should include multidisciplinary educational initiatives regarding the management of patients with acute AUB.
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.