The Female Pelvic Floor Fascia Anatomy: A Systematic Search and Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The female pelvis is a complex anatomical region comprising the pelvic organs, muscles, neurovascular supplies, and fasciae. The anatomy of the pelvic floor and its fascial components are currently poorly described and misunderstood. This systematic search and review aimed to explore and summarize the current state of knowledge on the fascial anatomy of the pelvic floor in women. METHODS: A systematic search was performed using Medline and Scopus databases. A synthesis of the findings with a critical appraisal was subsequently carried out. The risk of bias was assessed with the Anatomical Quality Assurance Tool. RESULTS: A total of 39 articles, involving 1192 women, were included in the review. Although the perineal membrane, tendinous arch of pelvic fascia, pubourethral ligaments, rectovaginal fascia, and perineal body were the most frequently described structures, uncertainties were identified in micro- and macro-anatomy. The risk of bias was scored as low in 16 studies (41%), unclear in 3 studies (8%), and high in 20 studies (51%). CONCLUSIONS: This review provides the best available evidence on the female anatomy of the pelvic floor fasciae. Future studies should be conducted to clarify the discrepancies highlighted and accurately describe the pelvic floor fasciae.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".