Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 29, 2025

Anogenital Distance and Perineal Measurements of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse POP Quantification System
Published on: September 20, 2018
The Quality and Quantity of Lower Genital Tract Research Across Multiple Journals
Michal Sheinis1, Megan Macfarlane2, Amanda Selk1
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Objective:
This study aimed to determine the quantity and quality of lower genital tract disease (LGTD) research by topic published across a variety of gynecology and dermatology journals.
Methods:
Authors accessed all articles that were rejected (1,111, 59.5%) and accepted (755, 40.5%) by the Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease ( JLGTD ) from 2008 to 2020. Studies were categorized by key topic: Cervix, Human Papillomavirus, Vulva, Vagina, Anal, and Other. Studies were further subcategorized based on methodology. These data were compared with all LGTD publications from 2018 to 2020 in 4 other widely recognized journals ( Obstetrics and Gynecology , The British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology , JAMA Dermatology , and the British Journal of Dermatology ).
Results:
Most JLGTD -accepted submissions were related to the cervix (298/755, 39.5%) and vulva (189/755, 25.0%). Rates of acceptance were similar across all key topic areas. Only 3.2% of publications in the other 4 journals (92/2,932) were related to LGTD topics. Across all 5 journals, vulva studies were most commonly case reports/case series (82/218, 37.6%), with a low prevalence of systematic reviews/meta-analyses (4/218 1.8%). In comparison, cervix studies had the highest number of systematic reviews/meta-analyses (14/317, 4.4%) and the lowest number of case reports (14/317, 4.4%).
Conclusions:
Vulvar research is of lower quality compared with cervix research published across 5 journals. Comparing accepted versus rejected articles in JLGTD , there is no publication bias against vulva topics noted; rather, the overall research quality in vulva is lower than that of cervical disease. This is a call to action for higher quality vulvar research.

