ArticleMedicine2019
A protocol for developing, disseminating, and implementing a core outcome set for stress urinary incontinence.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Outcome reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the pharmacological management of idiopathic overactive bladder (OAB) in women; a systematic review for the development of core outcome sets (COS).International urogynecology journal · 2022Pooled it
- Quality assessment of outcome reporting, publication characteristics and overall methodological quality in trials on synthetic mesh procedures for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse for development of core outcome sets.International urogynecology journal · 2021Pooled it
- Developing Core Outcome Sets (COS) and Core Outcome Measures Sets (COMS) in Cosmetic Gynecological Interventions: Protocol for a Development and Usability Study.JMIR research protocols · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRandomized trials evaluating interventions for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) have been using variable outcome measures, reporting a variety of outcomes. Alongside this variation across studies, outcome-reporting flaws contribute to a limited use of research to inform clinical practice. The development and use of core outcome sets (COSs) in future trials would ensure that outcomes important to different stakeholders and primarily women with SUI are reported more consistently and comprehensively.
methodsAn international steering group including healthcare professionals, researchers, and women with urinary incontinence will guide the development of this COS. Potential outcomes will be identified through comprehensive literature reviews. These outcomes will be entered into an international, multiperspective online Delphi survey. All key stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, researchers, and women with urinary incontinence, will be invited to participate. The modified Delphi method encourages stakeholder group convergence toward collective agreement, also referred as consensus, core outcomes. DISCUSSION: Dissemination and implementation of the resulting COS within an international context will be promoted and reviewed. Embedding the COS for SUI within future clinical trials, systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines could make a significant contribution to advancing the value of research in informing clinical practice, enhancing patient care and improving outcomes. The infrastructure created by developing a COS for SUI could be leveraged in other settings, for example, selecting research priorities and clinical practice guideline development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.