ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2026
Differences in sex development among individuals with a female phenotype and an absent uterus: Diagnostic approach.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveTo describe individuals with differences in sex development presenting with a female phenotype and an absent uterus and identify specific diagnostic characteristics that improve diagnostic accuracy and optimize patient care.Materials and MethodsThis descriptive comparative study included retrospective and prospective clinical data collected between 2023 and 2025 at the Reproductive Medicine Center "Universe," Tbilisi, Georgia. Among 233 individuals evaluated for primary amenorrhea, 26% with a female phenotype and an absent uterus who were evaluated for Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome, and ovotesticular disorder of sex development were included in the final sample. All participants underwent clinical, hormonal, genetic, and imaging assessment. Laparoscopy and histomorphological examination were performed when indicated.ResultsMayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome accounted for 57.4%, Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome for 37.7%, and ovotesticular disorder of sex development for 4.9% of the cases. Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome patients exhibited preserved breast development with absent or sparse pubic hair, whereas Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome and ovotesticular disorder of sex development patients exhibited normal pubic hair and breast development. Vaginal length was shortest in patients with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser, intermediate in those with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome, and variable in patients with ovotesticular disorder of sex development. Complete Androgen Insensitivity syndrome patients demonstrated male-range testosterone levels; Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser patients exhibited female-range hormone profiles, and ovotesticular disorder of sex development patients were observed to have nonspecific endocrine patterns. Ovotesticular disorder of sex development was confirmed histomorphologically.ConclusionAn integrated diagnostic approach combining specific clinical features, hormonal profiles, imaging, karyotyping, and histomorphology enables accurate differentiation of Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser, complete androgen insensitivity syndrome, and ovotesticular disorder of sex development.
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.