ReviewReproductive medicine and biology
International Expert Consensus Statement on Chronic Endometritis: A Comprehensive Literature Review and Modified e-Delphi Study.
Review in Reproductive medicine and biology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone Axis Activity in Women with Chronic Endometritis: A Prospective Observational Study.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Observational
- Chronic Endometritis and Endometrial Polyps in Female Infertility: Etiological Mechanisms, Diagnostic Insights, and Prognostic Implications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
40 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to develop international expert consensus statements on chronic endometritis (CE) through a comprehensive literature review of existing evidence and a modified Delphi approach. Methods: Ten panelists of the Japan Society of Reproductive Medicine Female Reproductive Tract Special Interest Group on CE performed a comprehensive review of the literature and derived statements with related comments on six specific domains of interest on CE. A two-round modified e-Delphi questionnaire was conducted among 31 international experts to evaluate the statements. Results: Twenty-three out of 24 statements, including 43 detailed items, on epidemiology (associated diseases and risk factors), symptomatology (asymptomatic or oligosymptomatic nature with subtle and nondescript gynecologic manifestations), etiology and pathogenesis (inflammation, infection, and clinical course), microbiology (associated pathogens), diagnosis (histopathology, immunohistochemistry, hysteroscopy, and microbiome analysis), and treatment (antibiotics, surgery, and multidrug resistance) finally reached a consensus. Notably, for the histopathologic diagnosis of CE, a threshold of ≥ 5 endometrial stromal plasma cells/10 high-power fields received an agreement rate of 81%. Conclusions: This comprehensive literature review and Delphi study provide a real-world clinical perspective on CE from diverse international experts. These consensus statements have the potential to lay a foundation for diagnostic criteria and/or clinical guidelines on CE.
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.