ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2026
Scar tenderness as a sensitive marker for uterine scar dehiscence or uterine rupture.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 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
Objective: To determine the sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of caesarean scar tenderness in predicting uterine dehiscence or rupture during per-operative findings. Methodology: This cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, JPMC, Karachi, from November 2021 to July 2024. Women with singleton pregnancies having previous caesarean were given Trial of Labor After Caesarean (TOLAC) after informed consent using consecutive sampling. Exclusion criteria included uterine abnormalities, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, multiple pregnancies, and pre-eclampsia. Data were collected on demographic details, clinical findings, and operative outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Version 27. Results: A total of 385 women were included in the study. Scar tenderness was present in 67.8% of women. Uterine rupture was found in 22.3% of cases, while scar dehiscence was present in 49.9%. The sensitivity of scar tenderness in predicting uterine rupture and dehiscence was 85.6%, and the specificity was 78.5%. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 91.2%, and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 67.7%. The overall diagnostic accuracy was 83.6%. Conclusions: Scar tenderness is a useful clinical predictor of uterine scar complications during TOLAC, particularly in low-resource settings.
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.