ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2025
To err is human: lessons from prolapse studies to identify and strategies to reduce data errors.
Article in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this manuscript is to describe the quality improvement auditing process developed by the Pelvic Floor Disorders Network of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development for assessing the primary outcome of pelvic organ prolapse quantification measurements in their prolapse research trials and provide the reader with the most iterative pelvic organ prolapse quantification form.
methodsWe reviewed the Pelvic Floor Disorders Network steering committee minutes, data coordinating center audit reports, and the case report forms for studies related to prolapse and summarized findings.
resultsErrors found were related to data entry and documentation of pelvic organ prolapse quantification data with sign errors and inaccurate Ba/Bp point assessments being most common. Quality tools implemented included improved case report forms and staff education to prevent errors, internal/central data audits with an electronic data monitoring system, clinical review for plausibility, and protocols to oversee source changes.
conclusionThis manuscript provides a framework of quality tools not only for best practices in data collection and quality improvement in prolapse research but also for primary outcomes of any research trial.
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.