We have located links that may give you full text access.
ACOG Scientific Integrity Deficiency in Recommendation for the Practice of Cosmetic-Plastic Gynecology Misleads Other Gynecological Societies, Inhibits Clinical Education and Research, and Jeopardizes Women's Health.
Journal of Reproductive Medicine 2016 January
OBJECTIVE: To analyze scientific integrity (scientific quality, objectivity, credibility, and appropriate transparency) of recommendations of gynecologic societies for female genital cosmetic surgery (FGCS) and their references, which were used to support these recommendations.
STUDY DESIGN: The scientific integrity of recommendations for FGCS published by gynecologic societies has never been subjected to scientific scrutiny. Electronic and manual searches for FGCS literature published in the English language were conducted and analyzed for the period of the recommendations. A methodological scientific review of recommendations of gynecologic societies for FGCS was performed. The scientific quality, objectivity, credibility, and appropriate transparency within recommendations of gynecologic societies for FGCS were evaluated.
RESULTS: Overt prejudice and residual bias were found in the recommendations of gynecologic societies relating to FGCS. Scientific imprecise interpretations and omissions of references called current recommendations into questions.
CONCLUSION: Recommendations issued by gynecologic societies relating to FGCS did not meet the scientific integrity norms for scientific quality, objectivity, credibility, and appropriate transparency.
STUDY DESIGN: The scientific integrity of recommendations for FGCS published by gynecologic societies has never been subjected to scientific scrutiny. Electronic and manual searches for FGCS literature published in the English language were conducted and analyzed for the period of the recommendations. A methodological scientific review of recommendations of gynecologic societies for FGCS was performed. The scientific quality, objectivity, credibility, and appropriate transparency within recommendations of gynecologic societies for FGCS were evaluated.
RESULTS: Overt prejudice and residual bias were found in the recommendations of gynecologic societies relating to FGCS. Scientific imprecise interpretations and omissions of references called current recommendations into questions.
CONCLUSION: Recommendations issued by gynecologic societies relating to FGCS did not meet the scientific integrity norms for scientific quality, objectivity, credibility, and appropriate transparency.
Full text links
Trending Papers
A Personalized Approach to the Management of Congestion in Acute Heart Failure.Heart International 2023
Potential Mechanisms of the Protective Effects of the Cardiometabolic Drugs Type-2 Sodium-Glucose Transporter Inhibitors and Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Heart Failure.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 Februrary 21
The Effect of Albumin Administration in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Single-Center Analysis.Critical Care Medicine 2024 Februrary 8
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app