ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Development and validation of a predictive model for the risk of endocervical curettage positivity.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to analyze the clinical characteristics of patients undergoing endocervical curettage (ECC), identify factors influencing ECC positivity, and develop a predictive model to assess the risk of positive ECC results. The goal was to assist clinicians in making ECC decisions and reduce missed diagnoses of cervical lesions. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 953 patients who underwent colposcopically directed biopsy and ECC at the gynecology clinic of the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University between October 2021 and September 2023 due to abnormal screening results. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify predictive factors for ECC positivity. An individualized prediction model for ECC positivity risk was developed using R Studio, and the model was subsequently evaluated and validated. Results: Among the 953 women, the ECC positive rate was 31.48% (300/953). Logistic regression analysis identified age ( Conclusions: The clinical prediction model developed in this study demonstrated good discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility. It can be used to evaluate the risk of ECC positivity in patients undergoing colposcopy, reduce missed diagnoses of cervical lesions, and aid clinicians in making ECC decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.