ReviewJournal of Indian Association of Pediatric Surgeons
Glans-Urethral Meatus-Shaft (GMS) Scoring System in Hypospadias: A Multicontinental Systematic Review and Meta analysis.
Review in Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric Surgeons. 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: Traditional hypospadias classification systems based solely on meatal position inadequately predict surgical complexity and outcomes. The Glans-Urethral Meatus-Shaft (GMS) scoring system was developed to provide multidimensional phenotypic assessment, incorporating glans morphology, meatal location, and penile curvature. Objective: To systematically evaluate the clinical utility of GMS scoring in hypospadias assessment, prognostic counseling, and surgical outcome prediction through a comprehensive analysis of published evidence. Materials and Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Ovid, and Google Scholar were systematically queried for studies reporting GMS scoring in unoperated hypospadias cases. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers. Statistical analysis employed random-effects models with 95% confidence intervals. Results: Twenty-seven studies encompassing 2300 unoperated hypospadias cases from 10 countries across the globe were included. Seventy-five percent of studies were published within the past 5 years. Studies demonstrated the following primary applications: Complication prediction ( Conclusions: GMS scoring provides a validated, reproducible hypospadias severity assessment with demonstrated clinical utility in risk stratification, surgical planning, and outcome prediction. While showing strong correlation with surgical complications, weaker associations with cosmetic outcomes indicate the need for complementary assessment tools. Integration with emerging technologies and standardization of scoring methodology represent key priorities for optimizing clinical implementation.
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.