Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 481

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevalence, potential risk factors for development and symptoms related to the presence of uterine niches following Cesarean section: systematic review

Bij de Vaate, A. J. M., van der Voet, L. F., Naji, O., Witmer, M., Veersema, S., Brölmann, H. A. M., Bourne, T., Huirne, J. A. F.·2014·Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

Objective: To review systematically the medical literature reporting on the prevalence of a niche at the site of a Cesarean section (CS) scar using various diagnostic methods, on potential risk factors for the development of a niche and on niche‐related gynecological symptoms in non‐pregnant women. Methods: The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched. All types of clinical study reporting on the prevalence, risk factors and/or symptoms of a niche in non‐pregnant women with a history of CS were included, apart from case reports and case series. Results: Twenty‐one papers were selected for inclusion in the review. A wide range in the prevalence of a niche was found. Using contrast‐enhanced sonohysterography in a random population of women with a history of CS, the prevalence was found to vary between 56% and 84%. Nine studies reported on risk factors and each study evaluated different factors, which made it difficult to compare studies. Risk factors could be classified into four categories: those related to closure technique, to development of the lower uterine segment or location of the incision or to wound healing, and miscellaneous factors. Probable risk factors are single‐layer myometrium closure, multiple CSs and uterine retroflexion. Six out of eight studies that evaluated niche‐related symptoms described an association between the presence of a niche and postmenstrual spotting. Conclusions: The reported prevalence of a niche in non‐pregnant women varies depending on the method of detection, the criteria used to define a niche and the study population. Potential risk factors can be categorized into four main categories, which may be useful for future research and meta‐analyses. The predominant symptom associated with a niche is postmenstrual spotting. Copyright © 2013 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/uog.13199

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 481

Metadata

Authors
Bij de Vaate, A. J. M., van der Voet, L. F., Naji, O., Witmer, M., Veersema, S., Brölmann, H. A. M., Bourne, T., & Huirne, J. A. F.
Venue
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-04
Volume
43
Issue
4
Pages
372-382
ISSN
  • 0960-7692 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-0705
OpenAlex
W1502269527
Cited by
481
References
5
FWCI
2.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prevalence, potential risk factors for development and symptoms related to the presence of uterine niches following Cesarean section: systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/uog.13199
The paper
Bij de Vaate, A. J. M., van der Voet, L. F., Naji, O., Witmer, M., Veersema, S., Brölmann, H. A. M., Bourne, T., & Huirne, J. A. F. (2014). Prevalence, potential risk factors for development and symptoms related to the presence of uterine niches following Cesarean section: systematic review. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.13199

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.