ArticleJournal of gynecologic oncology2026
Volume over location: prioritizing case volume over regional distribution in ovarian cancer treatment.
Article in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to examine the impact of hospital surgical volume and hospital region on overall survival (OS) in patients with ovarian cancer.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study utilized nationwide claims data from Korea (2012-2020) to analyze ovarian cancer patients who underwent surgery. Hospitals were classified as high-volume (≥20) or low-volume (<20) based on the annual volume of upfront ovarian cancer surgeries. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1) addressed confounder imbalances between the groups. OS was assessed via Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank tests, and Cox regression, with subgroup analyses by cancer stage.
resultsA total of 11,510 patients were included in the cohort (high-volume: 8,241; low-volume: 3,269), with 3,236 matched pairs identified through PSM. Compared with low-volume hospitals, treatment at high-volume hospitals was associated with a 21% reduction in mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]=0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.70-0.89). This survival advantage persisted across localized/regional (aHR=0.77; 95% CI=0.63-0.95) and distant-stage disease (aHR=0.81; 95% CI=0.71-0.92). In contrast, hospital location (capital vs. noncapital) was not significantly associated with OS in the entire cohort (aHR=1.09; 95% CI=0.97-1.21) or in stage-specific analyses.
conclusionThese findings highlight that instead of simply distributing hospitals geographically, establishing high-volume surgical centers is crucial to improving survival outcomes for patients with ovarian cancer.
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.