ArticleFrontiers in reproductive health2026
Endometrial thickness evaluation with ultrasonography assessment among normal and endometrial cancer across multi-ethnic Indonesian women.
Article in Frontiers in reproductive health, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Endometrial thickness is a crucial indicator for reproductive health evaluation and initial detection of abnormalities. This study aims to comprehensively characterize and evaluate the endometrium in normal and cancer of Indonesian women using ultrasonography. Methods: This retrospective investigation analyzed ultrasound data from three hospitals during 2021-2024 in women who met predefined inclusion criteria. Subjects were classified according to age, ethnicity, menopausal status, and ultrasound-based examination category. Results and Discussion: Endometrial thickness was quantified in 170 women with normal gynecological result and 82 women with histopathologically confirmed endometrial cancer. The average age of the normal group was 40.63 ± 0.91 years while the cancer group had an average age of 52.28 ± 1.33 years, significantly indicating that cancer subjects were generally of greater age. Endometrial thickness significantly decreased with advancing age, with the reduces values in women over 50 years (post-menopausal). There was a significant difference in endometrial thickness between normal and cancer cases, with optimal diagnostic cut-off values of 12.85 mm (AUC 0.89, sensitivity 0.83, specificity 0.94) for women aged ≤50 years and 10.20 mm (AUC 0.99, sensitivity 0.97, specificity 1.00) for women aged >50 years. These results underscore the robust relationship between age, menopausal status, and endometrial pathology, and support the clinical utility of ultrasound as a non-invasive method for early detection and risk profiling of endometrial abnormalities.
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.