ArticleCureus2026
Standardized Reporting in Gynecological Ultrasonography in India: The Need of the Hour.
Article in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gynecological ultrasonography (USG) is integral to evaluating adnexal masses, adenomyosis, endometriosis, and other pelvic pathologies. Despite advances in imaging, substantial variability in terminology and reporting persists, potentially leading to inconsistent communication and clinical decision-making. Established frameworks, including the Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) and International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Simple Rules (SR) for structured assessment of adnexal masses, the Assessment of Different NEoplasias in the adneXa (ADNEX) model for risk prediction, Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) terminology for adenomyosis, and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classifications, serve complementary roles in description, diagnosis, risk stratification, and classification. Standardized approaches may improve diagnostic consistency and facilitate clinical communication, research, audit, education, and the development of artificial intelligence-based tools. However, implementation requires appropriate training, familiarity with standardized terminology, and integration into routine clinical workflows. Drawing parallels with the widespread adoption of the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) in breast imaging, this commentary highlights the importance of broader adoption of standardized terminology and structured reporting in gynecological ultrasonography. Greater engagement of national professional societies, aligned with established international frameworks and recommendations from the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG), may help promote more consistent reporting practices and enhance patient care.
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.