ArticleBJU international2025
Intravaginal devices for running-induced urinary incontinence symptoms in females: a study protocol.
Article in BJU international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05773378 (Do Intravaginal Devices Reduce or Eliminate Exercise Induced Urinary Incontinence in Female Runners?), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Do Intravaginal Devices Reduce or Eliminate Exercise Induced Urinary Incontinence in Female Runners?
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Acupuncture combined with biofeedback electrical stimulation for female stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExercise-induced urinary incontinence (UI) can hinder physical activity, particularly in women engaging in high-impact activities. This condition is linked to reduced passive support of the urethra and bladder. Intravaginal devices that support pelvic structures may offer a solution, but high-quality evidence is lacking. STUDY
designThe study is an assessor-blind randomised controlled trial. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ENDPOINTS: Primary outcomes include frequency and amount of urine leakage during running over a 2-week period, Patient Global Impression of Improvement, treatment satisfaction, and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form, measured at baseline and after a 10-week intervention. Secondary outcomes include adherence and unintended effects. A subset of participants will be invited to a laboratory-based assessment at baseline and follow-up involving pelvic floor morphometry and function to explore the mechanisms through which the interventions may be effective. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe aim to recruit 90 runners aged ≥18 years, with female-typical pelvic anatomy, who report running-induced UI. After 2 weeks of leakage tracking without any intervention, participants will be randomly assigned to a 10-week pessary, tampon, or control intervention (1:1:1 ratio). Follow-up assessments will be performed at 11-12 and 16 weeks. Between- and within-group differences will be evaluated with general linear models using an intent-to-treat approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION AND ETHICS: This study is registered (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05773378), has been approved by the local Institutional Research Ethics Board, and follows the Declaration of Helsinki. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, shared with clinicians and participants, and disseminated publicly.
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.