Comparative fertility and pregnancy outcomes after local treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and stage 1a1 cervical cancer: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis from the CIRCLE group.

Clicks: 281
ID: 69966
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #255 of 442 articles by views in BMJ open

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 442 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
There are several local treatment methods for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia that remove or ablate a cone-shaped part of the uterine cervix. There is evidence to suggest that these increase the risk of preterm birth (PTB) and that this is higher for techniques that remove larger parts of the cervix, although the data are conflicting. We present a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) that will update the evidence and compare all treatments in terms of fertility and pregnancy complications.We will search electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE) from inception till October 2019, in order to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing the fertility and pregnancy outcomes among different excisional and ablative treatment techniques and/or to untreated controls. The primary outcome will be PTB (<37 weeks). Secondary outcomes will include severe or extreme PTB, prelabour rupture of membranes, low birth weight (<2500 g), neonatal intensive care unit admission, perinatal mortality, total pregnancy rates, first and second trimester miscarriage. We will search for published and unpublished studies in electronic databases, trial registries and we will hand-search references of published papers. We will assess the risk of bias in RCTs and cohort studies using tools developed by the Cochrane collaboration. Two investigators will independently assess the eligibility, abstract the data and assess the risk of bias of the identified studies. For each outcome, we will perform a meta-analysis for each treatment comparison and an NMA once the transitivity assumption holds, using the OR for dichotomous data. We will use CINeMA (Confidence in Network meta-analysis) to assess the quality of the evidence for the primary outcome.Ethical approval is not required. Results will be disseminated to academic beneficiaries, medical practitioners, patients and the public.CRD42018115495.
Reference Key
athanasiou2019comparativebmj Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Athanasiou, Antonios;Veroniki, Areti Angeliki;Efthimiou, Orestis;Kalliala, Ilkka;Naci, Huseyin;Bowden, Sarah;Paraskevaidi, Maria;Martin-Hirsch, Pierre;Bennett, Philip;Paraskevaidis, Evangelos;Salanti, Georgia;Kyrgiou, Maria;
Journal BMJ open
Year 2019
DOI
10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028009
URL
Keywords
"ablation techniques "cervical intraepithelial neoplasia "conization "pregnancy "premature birth"[mesh] adverse effects"[mesh] complications"[mesh] surgery"[mesh] therapy"[mesh]

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.