The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Maine Womenʼs Health Study: I. Outcomes of Hysterectomy
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of hysterectomy for nonmalignant conditions on symptoms and quality of life and to identify adverse effects 1 year after surgery. METHODS: The Maine Women's Health Study was a prospective cohort study of 418 women ages 25-50 years undergoing hysterectomy for any nonmalignant condition. Patients recruited from the practices of 63 physicians performing hysterectomy throughout Maine were interviewed at the time of surgery and 3, 6, and 12 months later. Clinical and hospitalization data were obtained from physician reports and from a statewide hospital discharge data base. The primary outcomes of interest were symptom relief, changes in quality of life, and the development of new symptoms or problems during the year following surgery. RESULTS: The most frequent indications for hysterectomy were leiomyomas (35%), abnormal bleeding (22%), and chronic pelvic pain (18%). For these indications, hysterectomy resulted in marked improvements in a range of symptoms, including pelvic pain, urinary symptoms, fatigue, psychological symptoms, and sexual dysfunction. Significant improvements in scores for indices of mental health, general health, and activity were evident at 6 months and sustained at 1 year. New problems after hysterectomy (measured in those free of the symptom preoperatively) included hot flashes (13%), weight gain (12%), depression (8%), and lack of interest in sex (7%). CONCLUSIONS: Hysterectomy is highly effective for relief of symptoms associated with common nonmalignant gynecologic conditions. Symptom relief following hysterectomy is associated with a marked improvement in quality of life. New problems are reported after hysterectomy by a limited number of women.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Inpatient hysterectomy surveillance in the United States, 2000-2004
Whiteman, M. K., Hillis, S. D., Jamieson, D. J., Morrow, B., Podgornik, M. N., Brett, K. M., & Marchbanks, P. A. (2008) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2007.05.039 · Cited by 639
Spies, J. (2002) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(01)01702-1 · Cited by 647
Female reproductive disorders: the roles of endocrine-disrupting compounds and developmental timing
Crain, D. A., Janssen, S. J., Edwards, T. M., Heindel, J., Ho, S.-M., Hunt, P., Iguchi, T., Juul, A., McLachlan, J. A., Schwartz, J., et al. (2008) · Fertility and Sterility · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.08.067 · Cited by 465
Uterine fibroids: current perspectives
Khan, A., Shehmar, M., & Gupta, J. (2014) · International Journal of Women's Health · doi:10.2147/ijwh.s51083 · Cited by 406
Risk factors for urinary incontinence among middle-aged women
Danforth, K. N., Townsend, M. K., Lifford, K., Curhan, G. C., Resnick, N. M., & Grodstein, F. (2006) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2005.07.051 · Cited by 395
Metadata
- Authors
- CARLSON, K. J., MILLER, B. A., & FOWLER, F. J.
- Venue
- Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Published
- 1994-04
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 556-565
- ISSN
- 0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2056343794
- Cited by
- 441
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 21.58
- 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: The Maine Womenʼs Health Study: I. Outcomes of Hysterectomy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00006250-199404000-00012
- The paper
- CARLSON, K. J., MILLER, B. A., & FOWLER, F. J. (1994). The Maine Womenʼs Health Study: I. Outcomes of Hysterectomy. Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006250-199404000-00012
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.