MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412480425 · doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2025.07.006

Cesarean Scar Niche and Pelvic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· review· en· W4412480425 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Thiel, Meghan McGrattan, Emiel Post Uiterweer, John Matelski, Chris Walsh, Judith A.F. Huirne, Ally Murji

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsTrillium Health CentreUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePelvic painMeta-analysisNicheSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Pain is a long-accepted but inadequately explored symptom of cesarean scar niche (CSN) and it is important to systematic assess the prevalence and features of pelvic pain associated with CSN, also referred to as cesarean scar defect or isthmocele. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the association between CSN and pelvic pain. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive strategy was used to search MEDLINE, EMBASE, Pub Med, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CINAHL from database inception to February 20th, 2025. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We included randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective cohorts, and case series involving symptomatic patients with a radiological diagnosis of CSN that evaluated pain as an outcome. Risk of bias was assessed with the Robins-I tool. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022346443). TABULATION, INTEGRATION AND RESULTS: The primary outcome was prevalence of pelvic pain in patients with confirmed CSN. Other outcomes included the risk of pain in patients with CSN compared those without, and changes in pain symptoms following medical or surgical management of niche. Sixty-four studies reported on pain (dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, chronic pelvic pain (CPP), suprapubic pain (SPP)) in patients with CSN. Patients with a CSN were at increased risk of dysmenorrhea (RR: 2.25, 95% CI, 0.90-5.63), dyspareunia (RR: 2.06 95% CI, 1.42-2.99), and CPP (2.72, 95% CI, 1.63-4.54) compared to those without. In patients with confirmed niche, the prevalence of dysmenorrhea was 38.2% (95% CI 28.8-48.6); dyspareunia 28.2% (95% CI 15.3-46.0); CPP 26.8% (95% CI, 18.6-36.9) and SPP 32.5% (95% CI, 18.6-36.9). Both medical and surgical treatment of CSN significantly reduced pain symptoms (OR: 0.13, 95% CI, 0.08-0.23). Most studies were high risk for measurement bias due to lack of standardization for outcome measures. CONCLUSION: There is a strong association between CSN and various pelvic pain symptoms. Future studies require standardization of nomenclature and reporting for pain in this context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.030
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Minimally Invasive GynecologySame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207