Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 466

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The epidemiology of hysterectomy: findings in a large cohort study

VESSEY, MARTIN P., VILLARD‐MACKINTOSH, LAURENCE, MCPHERSON, KLIM, COULTER, ANGELA, YEATES, DAVID·1992·BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology

Abstract

Objective To examine patterns of hysterectomy in the Oxford‐Family Planning Association (Oxford‐FPA) study in relation to age, parity, social class and calendar period (–1974, 1975–79. 1980–84, 1985–89). Design The Oxford‐FPA study is a large scale prospective study of 17 032 women recruited from 1968–74 and still under observation. Setting Seventeen family planning centres throughout England and Scotland. Subjects At recruitment the 17 032 women were all white, British, married, aged 25–39 and willing to co‐operate. In addition, they were using the pill or an intrauterine device or a diaphragm as their method of contraception. Main outcome measure Hysterectomy rates per 1000 woman‐years of observation in various subclasses of the data. Results Up to the end of 1989, 1885 (11.1%) of the 17 032 women in the study were known to have undergone hysterectomy. Fibroids were the most common cause followed closely by menstrual disturbances in the absence of fibroids (hereafter referred to as ‘menstrual disturbances’). Social class had a modest influence on hysterectomy rates. Hysterectomy for fibroids, prolapse, endometriosis and ‘other reasons’ showed little trend with calendar period while hysterectomy for menstrual disturbances and for cancer showed a sharp increase with calendar time especially at ages 30–39. Hysterectomy generally tended to increase with age and showed a strong relation to parity; in particular, hysterectomy for fibroids fell with parity and hysterectomy for menstrual disturbances rose sharply with parity. Using lifetable methods, it was estimated that almost 20% of the women in the study would have had a hysterectomy by age 55. Conclusions The results give insights into factors affecting hysterectomy rates. Of particular interest is the modest influence of social class, the strong influence of parity and the rise in rates with calendar time at ages 30–39 for those undergoing hysterectomy for menstrual disturbances or cancer, but since the cohort is not directly representative of the population, some caution is required in extrapolating these findings. The estimated hysterectomy rate of about 20% by age 55 is in line with other similar estimates for the United Kingdom.

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 · 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1992.tb13758.x

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.

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

Cited by

See all 466

Metadata

Authors
VESSEY, M. P., VILLARD‐MACKINTOSH, L., MCPHERSON, K., COULTER, A., & YEATES, D.
Venue
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1992-05
Volume
99
Issue
5
Pages
402-407
ISSN
  • 0306-5456 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-0328
  • 1471-0528
OpenAlex
W2038994407
Cited by
466
References
0
FWCI
20.05
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 epidemiology of hysterectomy: findings in a large cohort study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1992.tb13758.x
The paper
VESSEY, M. P., VILLARD‐MACKINTOSH, L., MCPHERSON, K., COULTER, A., & YEATES, D. (1992). The epidemiology of hysterectomy: findings in a large cohort study. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1992.tb13758.x

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.